Case law

Linda Holt v. John Griffin

865 F.3d 417 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 28, 2017

“For expert testimony to be admissible, the court must find the expert to be: (1) qualified; (2) her testimony to be relevant; and (3) her testimony to be rehable.” Id. at 441. … Defendants argue that the district court should not have qualified Chilton as an expert because his methodology was fundamentally unreliable.

United States v. Phillip Sanchez

440 F. App'x 436 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 23, 2011

Thus, the government presented evidence that established an interstate nexus. … In making this argument, Sanchez asks us to narrow radically the category of qualifying state offenses.

Royal Insurance Co. of America v. Orient Overseas Container Line Ltd.

514 F.3d 621 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 30, 2008

Appellants argue that Clause 4(D) is “expressly subjunctive and contingent” because preceded by the qualifying phrase “if applicable.” Appellants Reply Br. at 18. … The title of Clause 4(D)(4) explicitly makes that clause conditional by including the qualifying phrase “if applicable.”

Deja Vu of Cincinnati, L.L.C. v. Union Township Board of Trustees

326 F.3d 791 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 24, 2003

Spoons, Inc., the district court concluded that “sexually oriented businesses do not qualify as highly regulated industries.” 49 F.Supp.2d at 1040. … “[A]n enactment is void for vagueness if its prohibitions are not clearly defined.” Grayned v.

United States v. Kevin C. Pearce, Jr.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 18, 2024

The district court’s factual findings regarding Pearce’s role in the underlying offenses were not clearly erroneous. … Pearce argues that if he can establish that he did not engage in a continuing criminal enterprise, he satisfies § 4C1.1(a)(10).

Richard Truzzi v. Shell Oil Company

857 F.2d 1475 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 14, 1988

In denying Dabrowski's claim, we stated: 22 It does not necessarily follow, however, that the "most qualified candidate" has a cause of action for breach of contract if he or she does not happen to be selected. … rationale far beyond the limits to which it has thus far been confined by the Michigan courts, and would permit recovery with only the most ephemeral showing of consideration or detrimental reliance--an element much more clearly

Raczak v. Ameritech Corp.

103 F.3d 1257 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 9, 1997

All pages of both waiver forms were clearly labelled at the top with “PLEASE CONSULT WITH AN ATTORNEY BEFORE EXECUTING THIS DOCUMENT,” as required by 29 U.S.C. § 626 (f)(1)(E) 4 . *1261 The waivers also satisfied the other … The Detroit Office of the EEOC initially concluded in May 1993 that “the waiver and release were executed in [sic] voluntary and knowing fashion, and ... does not establish a violation of the statute.”

Philip Donald Hill v. University of Kentucky, Emery A. Wilson, M.D., and Richard W. Schwartz, M.D.

978 F.2d 1258 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 4, 1992

The evidence clearly establishes that Mr. Hill received adequate procedural due process throughout the appeal of his failing surgical clerkship grade and resultant dismissal. … V. 28 Finally, since we affirm the District Court's grant of summary judgment for the defendants, we find it unnecessary to address the sovereign and qualified immunity issues. 29 For the aforementioned reasons, we AFFIRM

Abu-Khaliel v. Gonzales

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 1, 2006

The Sixth Circuit case that the Tenth Circuit cites for this proposition, however deals with an IJ determining whether an immigrant qualifies for “extreme hardship.” See Valenzuela Alcantar v. … Gonzales Page 6 we nevertheless think it unlikely that Congress, intending, as it clearly did, to entitle illegal aliens to seek an adjustment

United States v. Michael Smith

395 F. App'x 223 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 31, 2010

SENTENCING The presentence report for Joshua established a base offense level of 34. … The government responds that the phone calls in question were clearly related to the drug conspiracy.

Tracy Walenciej v. E. Ohio Corr. Ctr.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 12, 2025

damages and (2) “political subdivisions like the EOCC are immune from punitive damages.” Id. at PID 869. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the EOCC on both claims. … But isolated comments from non-decisionmakers that are not clearly connected to the termination decision are rarely enough to show pretext.

Anne P. Vincenti v. Hilliard-Lyons, Inc.

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

Vincenti met the McDonnell Douglas test by showing that she was in a protected class, that she was qualified for her job, and that she was terminated. … Therefore, the district court did not clearly err in finding that the treatment of the male employees failed to establish that the reason for Vincenti's termination was pretextual or false. 29 Vincenti next argues that Stuckert's

United States v. Roy Pratt

704 F. App'x 420 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 26, 2017

Stat. §§ 218A.1412, 532.060(2)(c) (2001), they clearly count as serious drug offenses under the ACCA. … A defendant who is an armed career criminal under the ACCA, such as Pratt, also qualifies as an armed career criminal under the Sentencing Guidelines. U.S.S.G. § 4B1.4(a).

Dennis Speerly v. General Motors, LLC

143 F.4th 306 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 27, 2025

Because of their historical pedigree, certain “physical harms and monetary harms” can “readily qualify as concrete injuries under Article III.” Id. at 425. … This “inquiry trains on the legal or factual questions that qualify each class  No. 23-1940 Speerly et al. v.

Wagenknecht v. IRS

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 9, 2008

A judge who acts in excess of his jurisdiction is immune from suit, whereas a judge who acts in a clear absence of any jurisdiction might not be immune from suit. See Stump, 435 U.S. at 355-57. … Therefore, judicial immunity bars Wagenknecht’s arguments.

Terrence Gray v. Hugh Wolfenbarger

501 F. App'x 427 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 28, 2012

with respect to a claim that was adjudicated on the merits in a state court proceeding only if the state court’s adjudication resulted in a decision that was: (1) “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly … In Rock, the Supreme Court held that a criminal defendant has the constitutional right to testify on his own behalf, but it qualified that holding by stating that “the right to present relevant testimony is not without

Alvaro Lopez-Salgado v. Loretta Lynch

618 F. App'x 828 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 22, 2015

The IJ found that Lopez-Salgado was not credible, and that he had lied about key portions of his claim in an attempt to qualify for withholding of removal. Id. at 120–21 (IJ Dec. at 4–5). … clearly erroneous factual claims” made in - 11 - No. 14-3646 Lopez-Salgado v.

Ohio ex rel. Moore v. Brahma Investment Group

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 22, 2018

Finally, the court rejected Appellants’ conversion claim because the facts alleged did not show that Williams’ behavior was sufficiently wanton or reckless to qualify for the exception to statutory immunity for employees … See id. at 694 (to establish municipal liability under § 1983, a plaintiff must identify a municipal policy or custom that caused the plaintiff’s injury); Amerson v. Waterford Twp., 562 F.

600 Marshall Entertainment Concepts, LLC v. City of Memphis

375 F. App'x 513 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 26, 2010

Denial of Injunctive and Other Relief The district court found that 600 Marshall did not qualify for grandfathering because it had not established that there had been lawful adult entertainment at 600 Marshall at … “This court reviews a district court's legal conclusions de novo and its findings of fact under the clearly erroneous standard.” Great Lakes Expl. Group, L.L.C. v.

United States v. Sunnah Maddox

562 F. App'x 272 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 1, 2014

The Court then immediately and clearly instructed the jury to disregard the testimony. … Ruffin also argues he qualifies for Dorsey relief under the Fair Sentencing Act.