Case law

Saint Gobain Autover USA, Inc. v. Xinyi Glass North America, Inc.

666 F. Supp. 2d 820 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 12, 2009

Plaintiffs’ attack clearly goes to the weight and not the reliability of Dr. Giacomin’s report. See, e.g., Scrap Metal; One Beacon Ins., 147 Fed.Appx. at 544 . … Giacomin’s theoretical calculations is clearly admissible. As such, Plaintiffs’ motion to exclude evidence of theoretical calculations (Doc. No. 130) is DENIED. B.

McGory v. United States

651 F. Supp. 1337 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 27, 1987

The surface weather observations made at Franklin by a qualified weather observer revealed that the weather front had passed through the area by 6:10 P.M., EST. … The same record shows clearly that at the same time, the plane was still more than six miles from the Franklin Airport and was losing altitude at a frightening rate.

Dews

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 1, 2026

Dews’s immune labs. (Tr. 519.) He also noted that Mr. Dews’s asthma was well controlled, and his spirometry was normal. (Id.) On February 8, 2023, Mr. … In support of his assertion that the ALJ “clearly failed to consider the totality of [Plaintiff’s] impairments and their relating limitations when forming his RFC,” Mr.

Heart v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 4, 2022

The ALJ “need not discuss listings that the applicant clearly does not meet.”30 “If, however, the record raises a substantial question as to whether [the claimant] could qualify as disabled under a listing, the ALJ should … Plaintiff Heart does not show a plausible argument that he qualifies for Listing 1.02.

King v. Jones

319 F. Supp. 653 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Nov 3, 1970

Turning now to the merits of this action, there are again certain general principles of law which are so firmly established as to be recognized by all concerned. … Louisiana, 379 U.S. 536 , 85 S.Ct. 453 , 13 L.Ed.2d 471 (1965) speaks quite clearly to this problem.

Crown Equipment Corporation v. KeHE Distributors, LLC

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 3, 2019

Thus, I find that KeHE sending the signed purchase order to Crown on August 9 qualifies as an offer which Crown accepted by performance. … This kind of extrinsic evidence is not permitted to alter the intent clearly expressed by the price listed on the signed purchase plan.

Bash v. Textron Fin. Corp.

592 B.R. 819 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 27, 2018

Summary judgment should be granted if a party who bears the burden of proof at trial does not establish an essential element of his case. Tolton v. … According to the Trustee, the Ohio Department of Securities qualifies as an "innocent decision-maker."

Peskin v. Joseph and Florence Mandel Jewish Day School

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 29, 2020

Under this framework, Peskin’s claim clearly fails because the record establishes that Isaak- Shapiro made the decision to terminate Peskin before she requested FMLA leave. … Of course, Defendants’ argument that “Peskin clearly did not possess most skills” required for the job inherently calls into question whether Peskin was qualified to continue in her position thereby implicitly challenging

Stansell v. Grafton Correctional Institution

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 5, 2019

activity, the district court erred in dismissing his ADA and RA claims.”49 However, read in context, the Sixth Circuit was opining on what could constitute a service, program, or activity—not that Plaintiff’s claims were immune … to discrimination under the program . . . because of his disability.’”64 The plaintiff also “must show that the discrimination was directed toward him or her in particular.”65 Once these elements have been established

The Cleveco

59 F. Supp. 71 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 28, 1944

They affirm that such negligence was not established. … which the appellant relies so strongly are of course evidence bearing upon the question of due *80 The most that can be said for these inspection certificates, under the proof in this case, is that they were temporary and qualified

Flexsys America LP v. Kumho Tire U.S.A., Inc.

726 F. Supp. 2d 778 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 15, 2010

They are, however, further set apart from other solvents and qualified as “protic solvents.” … Nonetheless, the Court noted that the results at 3:1 were "clearly unsatisfactory.” Id. at 1218. 20 . Flexsys also attempts to establish equivalence through the expert opinion of Dr. Maleczka. In his declaration, Dr.

United States v. Hernandez

137 F. Supp. 2d 919 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 30, 2001

However, counsel was clearly justified in making this repre *925 sentation since the government explicitly so stated at the plea hearing. … The Court of Appeals opinion clearly indicates that there was no confusion as to whom were parties to the plea agreement.

United States v. Labine

73 F. Supp. 2d 853 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 25, 1999

La-Bine established the LaBine Family Trust Agreement. Mr. and Mrs. LaBine were both in their eighties when the trust was established. … The Conveyance Element one is clearly fulfilled because the transfer of the residence to the trust constitutes a conveyance.

Chapman v. Mountain Drive Thu

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Apr 11, 2022

A claim lacks an arguable basis in law or fact when it is premised on an indisputably meritless legal theory or when the factual contentions are clearly baseless. … To establish a violation under § 1983, a plaintiff must show that a person acting under color of state law deprived him or her of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States

Resolution Trust Corp. v. Zimmerman

853 F. Supp. 1016 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · May 27, 1994

‘May’ cannot reasonably be read to qualify the gross negligence liability standard and is therefore irrelevant to the substance of the provision.” … As the court explained: Congress [in § 1821(k) ] has clearly indicated that the liability of officers and directors of a bank are determined under federal law....

Goodwin v. County of Summit

45 F. Supp. 3d 692 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 8, 2014

Accordingly, to avoid abstention, plaintiffs must demonstrate that state law “clearly bars the interposition of the constitutional claims.” Am. … The Sixth Circuit ruled that the district court correctly determined that the case qualified for Younger abstention, but erred in dismissing the case without prejudice. 513 Fed.Appx. at 471-72 .

Toledo Blade Newspaper Unions Blad Pension Plan v. Investment Performance Services, LLC

565 F. Supp. 2d 879 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 21, 2008

employer real property or qualifying employer securities (as defined in section 1107(d)(4) and (5) of this title). 29 U.S.C. § 1104 (a). … Finally, there is no reason to think IPS’s advice under these circumstances was clearly prudent in spite of the high risk.

Malvasi v. Warden David W. Gray

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Nov 8, 2024

Malvasi submits that, even if the expert was qualified, he relied on “a reconstruction method[] that has not been established to be reliable.” Doc. 12- 2, at 8. … Malvasi also doesn’t explain what about the Ohio court of appeals’ decision he believes was “contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established Supreme Court precedent.”

Greene

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 20, 2026

First, participants must receive at least one opportunity per year to qualify for the reward. 29 C.F.R. § 2590.702(f)(4)(i). … Plaintiff, as the party invoking federal jurisdiction, bears the burden of establishing these standing elements. Id. To meet this burden, the plaintiff must “clearly allege facts demonstrating” each element. Id.

United States v. Empowering Integrated Care Solutions, LLC

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 18, 2025

confronted with a similar scenario where the plaintiff opposed a motion to dismiss, but made no counter-argument to the defendant’s assertion that plaintiff’s state law claims were barred due to political subdivision immunity … Id. at 248 (“Clearly, the provisions of R.C. 4113.52(A)(1) contemplate that the employer shall be given the opportunity to correct the violation.