Case law

Kurczi v. Eli Lilly & Co.

160 F.R.D. 667 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 27, 1995

Second, “it must appear that the representatives will vigorously prosecute the interests of the class through qualified counsel.” Id. … Thus, the question is clearly not common.

Gilmore v. Burch

District Court, N.D. Ohio · May 21, 2020

A claim lacks an arguable basis in law or fact when it is premised upon an indisputably meritless legal theory or when the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327. … To the extent that Plaintiff is alleging that Burch and/or Finney are liable for the conduct of prison officials not named as defendants, and it is well-established that supervisory officials are not liable under a theory

Alexander v. Youngstown Board of Education

454 F. Supp. 985 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Apr 12, 1978

Therefore, this reassignment was clearly integrative. … As previously indicated, the Youngstown defendants have had serious difficulties in securing qualified black teachers.

Smith v. Core Civic of America

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 29, 2019

An action has no arguable basis in law when a Defendant is immune from suit or when a Plaintiff claims a violation of a legal interest which clearly does not exist. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327. … A Plaintiff must also establish a subjective element showing that the prison officials acted with a sufficiently culpable state of mind. /d.

Wayside Farm, Inc. v. Bowen

698 F. Supp. 1356 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 27, 1988

. § 1396i(c)(2) which provides that Any skilled nursing facility or immediate care facility which is dissatisfied with a determination by the Secretary that it no longer qualifies as a skilled nursing facility or intermediate … Section 558 clearly applies to the issuance of a license and a suspension of licenses. The Court is unable to find any basis for its application to this case.

Moore v. Sulzer Orthopedics, Inc.

337 F. Supp. 2d 1002 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · May 18, 2004

To market a Class III device within the United States, “the manufacturer must either submit its product to the FDA for premarket approval (TMA process’), or qualify for one of two exceptions to this time-intensive regulatory … Courts that have considered this issue have stated clearly and uniformly that, “[w]hen analyz-ing questions of federal law, the [MDL] transferee court should apply the law of the circuit in which it is located.”

Page

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 23, 2025

A claim lacks an arguable basis in law or fact where it is premised on an indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327. … The Court “shall dismiss the case” if it (i) “is frivolous or malicious,” (ii) “fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted,” or (iii) “seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.

Roberts v. Scott

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 9, 2019

An action has no arguable basis in law when the Defendant is immune from suit or when the Plaintiff claims a violation of a legal interest which clearly does not exist. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327. … Plaintiff must also establish a subjective element showing the prison officials acted with a sufficiently culpable state of mind. Id.

Cook v. Mr. Walters

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 28, 2022

Courts are not required, however, to accept as true factual allegations that are clearly irrational or wholly incredible. Denton v. … Furthermore, it is well established that the federal statute invoked in Quern v. Jordan, 440 U.S. 332, 340-41, 99 S. Ct. 1139, 59 L. Ed. 2d 358 (1979).

Robinson v. Rhodes

424 F. Supp. 1183 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 29, 1976

It is alleged that they qualify for the receipt of payments under the general relief program, purportedly administered by the Summit County welfare department under the supervision of the Ohio Department of Public Welfare … However, to clear the record, the Court shall grant plaintiffs’ leave to amend their complaint to more clearly delineate the nature of their claims. 2 . The Ohio statutes refer to said program as “poor relief’.

Sprott v. Ottawa Hills Local School District

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 3, 2024

because none engaged in an affirmative act which created or increased the risk to Plaintiffs, (2) no Teacher Defendant acted with a sufficiently culpable mental state to meet the deliberate indifference standard; and (3) no clearly … established law informed the teachers that any conduct was constitutionally illegal and thus they are entitled to qualified immunity.

W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc.

670 F. Supp. 760 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 6, 1987

Although Garlock established some prior relationship between Dr. Sperati and W.L. … Sperati’s testimony does not establish infringement.

Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Kramer

816 F. Supp. 1242 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 11, 1992

The court stated that “where the Arbitration Act is applicable and no qualifying contractual language has been alleged, the district court errs in granting injunctive relief.” 726 F.2d at 1292 . … During his deposition it developed that he is paid a bonus for attracting the Kemper securities established brokers with other firms. See Deposition, pp. 25-26. 5 . See Silbiger Deposition, p. 30. 6 .

Kaplan

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 23, 2026

In their Motion for Summary Judgment, Defendants argue that Plaintiff cannot establish a prime facie age discrimination case because (1) she was ill-qualified for the RBM role, and (2) Plaintiff cannot identify a comparator … To establish a prima facie case of religious/national origin discrimination using circumstantial evidence, a plaintiff must demonstrate that: (1) he is a member of a protected class; (2) he was qualified for his job; (3

GBX Associates LLC v. United States of America

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Nov 14, 2022

The Internal Revenue Code allows a deduction for a qualified conservation contribution, which is a contribution of a “qualified real property interest” to a qualified organization exclusively for conservation purposes. … Although the Verified Complaint does not contain the word “vacatur,” it clearly requests that the Court “set aside” Notice 2017-10 under APA § 706(2).

Muir v. CHRYSLER LLC

563 F. Supp. 2d 783 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 27, 2008

Plaintiff has established causation. Therefore, Plaintiff has established three of the four elements of the prima facie case. His failure to identify a protected activity means a failure to sustain the claim. … The interview of Garcia and Plaintiff clearly focused on the list of addresses rather than the underlying allegations of gender discrimination.

Alford v. Foley

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 20, 2024

appellate court’s determination of the claim was contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law. … Alford can establish either that the state court decision adjudicating his claim “resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by

Busacca v. Excavating, Building Material & Construction Drivers Union Local 436 Welfare Fund Board of Trustees

953 F. Supp. 867 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 13, 1996

Nevertheless, Plaintiff is clearly suing for indemnification of expenses incurred as a result of his actions during his employment with the Fund. … Any other conclusion would violate the primary goal of ERISA, which is to safeguard the financial *876 integrity of qualified plans by shielding them from unanticipated claims.

Chandler v. Cleveland Metropolitan School District Board of Education

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 13, 2019

To explain the discrepancy, the Court describes what qualifies as an adverse employment action. … behavior cannot immunize that employee from those petty slights or minor annoyances that often take place at work and that all employees experience.”87 “The standard for showing a materially adverse action is not onerous

DeBarr v. Cleveland Clinic Foundation

918 F. Supp. 2d 676 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 15, 2013

In any event, defendant asserts, plaintiff fails to establish pretext. … Notwithstanding, even if they had referred to plaintiff as “old school,” the comment is ambiguous at best and would clearly require an inference to conclude that this referred to age.