Case law

Brian Lyngaas v. Curaden AG

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 24, 2021

As for Curaden AG, however, the court held that Lyngaas had failed to establish that Curaden AG qualified as a “sender” under the TCPA.  Nos. 20-1199/1200/1243 Lyngaas v. … That standard is clearly met here.

W. Paul Mayhue v. Cherry Street Services, Inc.

598 F. App'x 392 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 27, 2015

“An abuse of discretion occurs when (1) the district court’s decision is based on an erroneous conclusion of law, (2) the district court’s findings are clearly erroneous, or (3) the district court’s decision is clearly … employment action; (3) that he was otherwise qualified for the position he held; and (4) that he was replaced by a younger employee outside of the protected class.

Patricia J. Butler v. Ohio Power Company

91 F.3d 143 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 16, 1996

Furthermore, in work force reduction or corporate reorganization cases, 2 we have held that in order to establish a prima facie case, a plaintiff not only must show that he was age 40 or older, was discharged, and was qualified … The record supports defendant's assertion that plaintiff's poor performance motivated her discharge, and this reason is clearly a sufficient basis for defendant's decision.

Thompson v. Bell

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 23, 2004

qualified response, counsel for Respondent never asked Crown was of the opinion that Petitioner was severely Dr. Crown whether, assuming that Dr. … It quite clearly did exist, and that evidence was in expert testimony to establish that Thompson suffered habeas counsel’s possession, via Dr.

Ellis v. Buzzi Unicem USA

293 F. App'x 365 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 24, 2008

However, Ellis did not offer evidence that he was qualified for these positions or that he had seniority over employees currently occupying these positions and therefore the district court assumed that Ellis was not qualified … The Tennessee Supreme Court in Anderson clearly adopted the burden-shifting framework familiar in federal employment discrimination cases. See Anderson, 857 S.W.2d at 558-59 .

Beers Construction Co. v. Pikeville United Methodist Hospital of Kentucky, Inc.

129 F. App'x 266 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 28, 2005

The phrase “legal proceedings” is not limited or qualified in any way. … Under ordinary rules of contract interpretation, it is clear that the phrase “but subject to legal proceedings” qualifies the phrase “shall be final and binding,” but is not itself qualified or limited, and operates to

Arthur S. Langenderfer, Inc. v. S.E. Johnson Co.

917 F.2d 1413 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 29, 1990

Sader is not ODOT “qualified,” and cannot bid on ODOT or OTC asphalt paving *1424 contracts, although Sader does subcontracting on ODOT work. … We conclude that this thirteen-county ODOT/OTC asphalt paving market is established.

Malis v. Hills

588 F.2d 545 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 7, 1978

Accordingly, when the Secretary of HUD acts pursuant to a statute such as the Housing Act of 1964, this Court must accord "great deference" to the Secretary's actions and may reverse such determinations only when they are "clearly … As previously stated, pursuant to statute, only needy persons with extremely limited incomes may qualify for ADC benefits.

United States v. Aleo

681 F.3d 290 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 15, 2012

The subsequent filing of the motion does not establish that he was acting in bad faith. … What, moreover, if a prosecutor “sign[ed] an unjustified indictment,” keeping in mind the “doctrine of prosecutorial immunity”? White, 980 F.2d at 843.

United States v. William E. Roberts

86 F.3d 1156 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 24, 1996

86 F.3d 1156 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 copies of cited unpublished … On its face, this statute clearly falls within the ambit of "burglary," which is listed in § 924(e) as a crime of violence.

Daniel Tascarella v. Aptiv US Gen. Servs. P'ship

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 4, 2026

But he need not establish this factor by “clear and convincing evidence.” PCC Airfoils, 176 F.4th at 513. … This “phrase clarifies that, on balance, the four preliminary injunction factors must clearly weigh in the plaintiff’s favor to qualify for injunctive relief.” Id. No more; no less.

Doggrell v. Great Southern Box Co., Inc., of Mississippi

206 F.2d 671 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 9, 1953

Wicks, 75 Tenn. 40 ." 21 The state policy of Tennessee as evinced by the Supreme Court in several decisions has been to retain rigid control of the method by which a foreign corporation qualifies to do business within the … Smith, 134 Ark. 23 , 203 S.W. 6, 8 , the court in its opinion quoted with approval from Cook on Corporations, Vol. 1, Section 234, as follows: "The great weight of authority has clearly established the rule that where a supposed

Nikolay Rudzevich v. Eric H. Holder, Jr.

344 F. App'x 201 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 27, 2009

Rudzevich cannot qualify for asylum unless he is a “refugee” within the meaning of 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A). … Under the circumstances, Rudzevich’s sufferings are not so extreme as to qualify as past persecution. See, e.g., Lumaj v.

James Calloway v. Caraco Pharm. Lab., Ltd.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 26, 2015

The District Court’s Factual Findings Were Not Clearly Erroneous Finally, Caraco argues that several of the district court’s factual findings were clearly erroneous, including: (1) that Movens repeatedly refused to … Accordingly, the district court’s factual findings were not clearly erroneous. III.

United States v. Joseph Krul

774 F.3d 371 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 18, 2014

The Supreme Court construed this statement as “indicat[ing] that Tapia should serve a prison term long enough to qualify for and complete that program.” See id. … “[T]he burden of establishing entitlement to relief for plain error is on the defendant claiming it,” United States v.

United States v. Alan Silber

456 F. App'x 559 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 23, 2012

We need not take sides on this debate because the district court concluded it was “[m]ore likely than not” that “Silber, as a trained doctor, was aware o[f] the serious risks, including weakening of the immune system, loss … But that does not make the court’s finding that Silber was aware of any risk clearly erroneous, as it must have been in order to justify our intervention. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).

Abdoulaye Traore v. Eric Holder

358 F. App'x 677 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 22, 2009

Although we find this administrative determination clearly erroneous and unsupported by the record when viewed as a whole, the provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(3) deny jurisdiction to any court to review such a timeliness … Thus, to qualify for withholding of removal, the petitioner “must establish that there is a clear probability that he will be subject to persecution if forced to return to the country of removal.”

United States v. Frederick Gross

432 F. App'x 490 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 25, 2011

The court first considered the seriousness of the offense, noting that Gross faced a possession charge, had an extensive criminal history that included aggravated assault and burglary convictions, and qualified for a fifteen-year … Frederick Gross Second, Gross argues that there was insufficient evidence to establish that he was an unlawful user of controlled substances at the time of the firearm possession.

Shirley Rosser v. Pipe Fitters Local 392, Robert Sullivan

12 F.3d 214 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 2, 1993

Second, length of employment may increase without one attaining the rights and benefits of qualifying for the name-request system. … Consequently, the clearly erroneous standard governs this Court's review of the district court's finding that Appellees did not intentionally discriminate against Appellants on the basis of race.

United States v. Bailey

553 F.3d 940 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 20, 2009

Shortly after making this ruling that clearly limits the use of Stanford's oral statements, however presented to the jury, to impeachment, the district court also limited the use of Exhibit 12 to impeachment only. … Flight from the police certainly qualifies as "evasive conduct." See United States v.