Case law

In Re Impact Absorbent Technologies, Inc. And Loraday Environmental Products, Ltd.

106 F.3d 400 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 18, 1996

106 F.3d 400 41 U.S.P.Q.2d 1633 NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of … It is not incorporated in and has not qualified to do business in Ohio.

Laura Ward, Widow of William Ward v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor

896 F.2d 554 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 26, 1990

One performed on October 27, 1980, produced non-qualifying results, while another, administered on August 25, yielded qualifying values. Dr. … The ALJ was clearly entitled to rely on Dr.

Thomas Blume v. John E. Potter, Postmaster Gen

289 F. App'x 99 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 14, 2008

To establish a prima facie case under the Rehabilitation Act, Blume must prove: (1) that he is a person with a disability as defined by the Act; (2) that he is otherwise qualified; and (3) that he was subject to discrimination … Third, Blume argues that the Postal Service was clearly aware of his temper problems because it had previously warned him about prior temper outbursts.

Dorothy Johnson v. Memphis Light, Gas & Water Div.

777 F.3d 838 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 6, 2015

The 2010 policy also stated that “[e]xceptions will be considered for customers 60 years of age and older,” but the MLGW employees Johnson encountered did not attempt to see if he qualified for an exception. … Kato, 549 U.S. 384, 388 (2007), and it has been well established that a § 1983 federal civil rights claim accrues “‘when the plaintiff knows or has reason to know of the injury which is the basis of his action.’”

Dominique Dushon Gilbert v. United States

64 F.4th 763 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 7, 2023

We held that he could establish Strickland prejudice by establishing that he would have negotiated a better plea; thus, “with proper advice, the outcome of those negotiations would have been different.” Id. at 490. … App’x 138, 141 (6th Cir. 2020) (stating that “[t]hat statute leaves no room to maneuver”),6 we have not yet considered whether a separate state sentence qualifies as “any other term of imprisonment.”

William Andrew Wright v. Stephen Spaulding

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 19, 2019

From the beginning, § 2255 was qualified by a saving clause—in non-legalese, an “unless.” … A legal conclusion that is necessary to the judgment qualifies.

Eric Gunnels v. Robert Kenny

700 F. App'x 478 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 20, 2017

Thus, a plaintiff may overcome an officer’s qualified immunity in the Fourth Amendment context, despite that officer’s reliance on a warrant, if the plaintiff can show that (1) the officer made the false statements knowingly … and intentionally or with a reckless disregard for the truth; and (2) without the false statements or omissions, the remainder of the affidavit on which the warrant is based is insufficient to establish probable cause.

United States v. John Ford

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 26, 2009

This payment also established a basis for the enhancement under § 2C1.1(b)(1). … The payments made to Ford were made in a manner to clearly influence more than one event. The evidence establishes that each payment was accomplished by another action by Ford in his authority as a state senator.

Kevin Rabbers v. Commissioner Social Security

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 5, 2009

In fact, it explicitly did not “decide the question of whether a de minimis violation may qualify as harmless error.”8 Id. … First, the ALJ’s failure to rate the B criteria at step two of the five-step analysis was clearly harmless.

Nightclubs Inc v. Cty Paducah

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 2, 2000

Regina’s House of Dolls qualifies as an Nightclubs, Inc. bears the burden of proving to the court “adult cabaret” under § 11-2(3) of the ordinance.1 that the ordinance does not provide an avenue for prompt judicial … Where judicial review is limited establishment.” Ord. § 11-6(e).

United States v. Hunt

278 F. App'x 491 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 16, 2008

Hunt Defendant’s written motion to suppress did not clearly identify the statement(s) he sought to suppress. … It follows that, even though defendant was not charged with or convicted of perjury, his admission that he provided materially false information to his parole officer and to the court established conduct that clearly qualified

United States v. Judith Ann Huguenin (97-5152) and William A. Martin (97-5160)

154 F.3d 547 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 19, 1998

As established by Sitz , the alleged purpose of the Airport Road checkpoint, the detection of intoxicated drivers, clearly satisfies the first factor — the gravity of the public concern. 496 U.S. at 451 , 110 S.Ct. 2481 . … His duties included qualifying deputies for firearms licenses, teaching school children through the D.A.R.E. program, and enforcing laws regarding narcotics. He had been trained in DUI detection in 1990.

Rita Johnson v. Timothy Morales

946 F.3d 911 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 7, 2020

But the Court qualified this interest in Gilbert v. Homar, 520 U.S. 924 (1997). … “To establish a violation of substantive due process, a plaintiff must first establish the existence of a constitutionally-protected property or liberty interest.” Silver v.

United States v. Elmer S. Edwards

949 F.2d 397 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 5, 1991

Starkey agreed to cooperate with the investigation and act as a confidential informant in return for immunity. Starkey admitted participating in the robbery, and identified Billy Gaston, J.C. … because the district court improperly admitted Hedger's identification testimony. 37 There is a two-part standard of review of a district court's decision on a motion to suppress evidence: Findings of fact are upheld unless clearly

United States v. Ahee

5 F. App'x 342 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 15, 2001

Ahee clearly meet the definitions found in IRC § 61. Ballard, 535 F.2d, at 404 . … The trial judge actually brushed aside an attempt by the prosecutor to qualify CPA Jeanguenat as an expert during the course of the trial. As to Ms.

Quality Measurement Co. v. IPSOS S.A.

56 F. App'x 639 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 8, 2003

Although the Indiana district court decided that Rosenberg was qualified to testify as a witness, that does not necessarily mean that IPSOS did nothing improper in hiring him. … While this argument has merit, Ohio and Indiana case law clearly indicate that so long as the spoliation is discovered before the trial is underway, the parties are deemed to have sufficient time to make their case.

Eustace Weekes v. Michigan Chrome & Chemical Company, a Michigan Corp.

352 F.2d 603 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 10, 1965

Comment j to 388. 39 The authors, however, qualified the foregoing with observations appearing in Comment i to 388, 40 'The giving to the third person through whom the chattel is supplied all the information necessary to … contributory negligence.' 56 By this I believe that the trial judge in general language made clear that defendant could not be held liable for the acts of an intermediate or intervening party, but only for its own negligence as established

United States v. Richard Meade

677 F. App'x 959 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 26, 2017

§ 2312, which is a qualifying predicate offenses under § 1961(1). … The defendants were free to find holes in the experts’ testimony, undermine their credibility, and establish doubt in the minds of the jurors.

Hancock v. Dodson

958 F.2d 1367 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 23, 1992

The stipulation occurred because discovery had established that Schrah had never touched Hancock. … immunity because he acted reasonably under the circumstances.

Lamont Heard v. Patricia Caruso

351 F. App'x 1 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 27, 2009

Metrish, 564 F.3d 794, 798-801 (6th Cir. 2009) (holding that the doctrine of sovereign immunity bars the recovery of monetary damages under RLUIPA when state officials are sued in their official capacities). … We assume that Heard’s August 15, 2006 supplemental response and attached affidavit qualifies as a request for additional discovery pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(f).6 We have explained that “[t]ypically