Case law

Marshall v. Moore

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 16, 2024

Supreme Court has not clearly established that a state court’s admission of propensity evidence is unconstitutional. Bugh v. … Moreover, his third ground for relief is not cognizable in this Court, because there is no clearly established Supreme Court precedent establishing a due process violation for permitting propensity evidence.

White v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 25, 2021

The above testimony clearly establishes that Dr. Cohen did not complete the medical source statement attributed to him. … Ohio Jul. 29, 2014) (finding that Plaintiff’s testimony did not qualify as “medical documentation establishing the need” for the cane under SSR 96-9p) (Pearson, J.); Smith v.

Carr v. FCA US, LLC

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 31, 2022

App’x 331 (6th Cir. 2002) (impairment must show preclusion from broad class of jobs to qualify as disability). … Further, comments from other witnesses described the context of Carr’s actions as “clearly emotional,” “like an unruly child,” “upset and argumentative,” “disrespectful,” and “unprofessional.” (Doc.

Potoma v. Cleveland Clinic Foundation

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 28, 2025

We are clearly underperforming.” (Id.) On October 14, 2021, Potoma contacted Tilow to inform him she intended to resign. (Doc. 30-24 at 1666.) … The parties do not dispute that Potoma has a disability, is otherwise qualified for her position, and CCF knew of her disability.

Clotz v. MobileHelp, LLC

District Court, N.D. Ohio · May 8, 2023

Therefore, the second affidavit qualifies both as a conventional affidavit and as an unsworn declaration under 28 U.S.C. § 1746(2). … Oldroyd establish that a user purporting to be Mr. Clotz accessed both the subject websites, entered Mr.

Chapman v. Eppinger

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 5, 2024

A state court’s decision is “contrary to” clearly established federal law “if the state court arrives at a conclusion opposite to that reached by [the Supreme] Court on a question of law or if the state court decides a … established federal law, federal courts may not grant habeas relief if the state court’s error was harmless.43 The petitioner bears the burden of showing harm and must establish “actual prejudice.”44 This means that

Bridgeman v. City of Bedford Heights

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

. § 1915(e) if it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, lacks an arguable basis in law or fact, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. Neitzke v. … 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.

CajunLand Pizza, LLC v. Marco's Franchising, LLC

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 31, 2022

However, CLP is not immune from MFLLC’s request, as it brought claims that MFLLC argues fall within the ARA’s fee provision. … They are not making that argument – they clearly acknowledge that the contracts govern their relationships, as they are arguing breach of those contracts.

Adams v. Eppinger

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 13, 2023

established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States,”36 and (2) the federal error “had a substantial and injurious effect 30 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). … But clearly established federal law required Ohio to provide an evidentiary hearing to decide whether knowledge of Adams’s prior conviction sufficiently biased the jurors.

Redding v. Truck Service, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 14, 2023

the suspicion that the defendant is the unusual employer that discriminates against the majority;’ (2) that Plaintiff ‘was qualified for the job;’ (3) that Plaintiff ‘suffered an adverse employment decision;’ and (4) … TSI’s Employee Handbook clearly states that “TSI may terminate the employment relationship at will at any time,” that the Handbook policies “are not intended to create a contract,” and that those policies “may be amended

Ohio Public Employees Retirement System v. Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp.

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 29, 2025

The internal risk management tools OPERS cites served different purposes than public disclosure and do not establish the falsity of the qualified public statements. … Companies are not required to qualify accurate reports of past successes by mentioning possible future challenges.

Ahner v. Smith

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Nov 1, 2019

Mich. 2002) (holding that sovereign immunity also prevented the court from joining CMS). 3 Although part of its substantive holding appears to be superseded by R.C. § 2323.44, which prevents parties from … I do not decide whether this qualifies as a sudden emergency because even if it did, plaintiffs would not be entitled to summary judgment on that ground. Plaintiffs, relying on Szilagyi v.

Williams v. Partners for Payment Relief, LLC

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 28, 2020

Defendants tried the case despite knowing they could not establish standing. … “District courts have decided, and we agree, that a clearly false representation of the creditor's name may constitute a “false representation ... to collect or attempt to collect any debt” under Section 1692e.”

Goff v. Chambers-Smith

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 4, 2021

He does not clearly identify the “religious accommodation” for which he applied. … employees, and to dismiss before service any such complaint that the court determines is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune

Gilford v. Aqua Ohio

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Apr 29, 2021

The Court, however, has discretion to refuse to accept without question the truth of Plaintiff’s allegations when they are “clearly baseless,” a term encompassing allegations that may be fairly described as “fanciful,” … To state a claim under § 1983, the 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.

Alghusain v. Nemeth

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 7, 2021

Finally, he summarily states that “Defendants clearly and collectively * * * violated Ohio Revised Code § 4112.02.” (Id. at 55). … Gupta] knowing he is not qualified, had long history of destroying businesses and entrepreneurs, and by offering him a short cut to be the Manager of Strategic Initiatives to the Ohio Turnpike Commission, have harmed, and

Green v. Willoughby Hills Police Department

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 26, 2025

federal court, and to dismiss before service any such complaint that the court determines is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary damages from a defendant who is immune … Plaintiff has also established a pattern of submitting voluminous and largely frivolous filings across various state and federal cases.

United States v. One Million, Thirty-Two Thousand, Nine Hundred Eighty Dollars in U.S. Currency ($1,032,980.00)

855 F. Supp. 2d 678 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 2, 2012

Clearly, at no point during this series of events were Vigna or Curtis free to leave and, clearly, no reasonable person would have felt free to leave under the circumstances. … of the alerting dog and establish probable cause.

Mayle v. Laborer's International Union of North America

678 F. Supp. 690 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 30, 1987

Ephraim Mayle agreed to resign should it be officially determined that he was not qualified to hold office. Id. Mike Mayle, the secretary-treasurer, then wrote to the International for clarification of the issue. … The evidence clearly indicates that Ephraim Mayle stepped down voluntarily based on a position letter received from the International Union on his retirement status in relation to holding office.

Hughes v. University Hospitals

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 6, 2025

The causes of action in the Complaint are not clearly delineated, but the Court construes ! … Defendants argue that they are entitled to statutory immunity against such claims. (R. 5, PageID# 82-83).