Case law

Doe 1 v. Varsity Brands, LLC

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 24, 2024

establish that certain allegations were set forth therein, but the Court disregarded or misapprehended them. … Plaintiff reiterates his argument that forcible rape under O.R.C. § 2907.02 qualifies under the plain language of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b).

Iron Workers Local Union No. 17 Insurance Fund v. Philip Morris Inc.

23 F. Supp. 2d 796 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 14, 1998

Industries is not licensed or qualified to do business in Ohio, has no employees in Ohio, and does not contract to supply goods or services in Ohio. B. … Should this Court find sufficient national contacts for jurisdiction under § 1965(d) of RICO, the same con *803 tacts are sufficient to establish jurisdiction under § 22 of the Clayton Act. 15 Plaintiffs here seek to establish

Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co. v. Norton Co.

280 F. Supp. 674 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 29, 1968

The Hurst ’738 patent does not, on its face, as clearly teach a compacted structure as do the Benner patents. … If that is so, he clearly could not have tested the Hoover application in the true light of the prior art.

Dorsey v. Aviva Metals, Inc.

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

Evidence regarding post-shift activities is not yet fully or clearly developed. … Plaintiffs’ counsel is qualified for the reasons stated in the operative motion. Taken together, adequacy of representation has been established. 3.

Jose Manuel Baez Cruz v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 18, 2026

An “ALJ should discuss the relevant listing, however, where the record raises ‘a substantial question as to whether [the claimant] could qualify as disabled’ under a listing.” Smith-Johnson, 579 F. … Plaintiff’s conclusory argument that the record “clearly established that [he] met the criteria of [SSR 96-9p]” does not change this analysis.

Savel v. MetroHealth System

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 25, 2024

You may email questions about certain vacancies for which you qualify to TalentAquisition.org. … To establish a prima facie case of disparate treatment, a plaintiff must establish: (1) his membership in a protected class; (2) that he suffered an adverse employment action; (3) that he was qualified for his position

Crew

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 3, 2026

purposes of a motion for judgment on the pleadings, all well-pleaded material allegations of the pleadings of the opposing party must be taken as true, and the motion may be granted only if the moving party is nevertheless clearly … immunity, and the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the municipality finding it was not liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Braun v. Meijer Inc.

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 20, 2025

The conduct of [Thrifty’s] officers, employees, and agents (except to the extent [Thrifty] is immune from suit for workplace injuries covered by Adecco’s workers’ compensation program and suffered … The evidence (or lack thereof) confirms Adecco had no on-site supervisory role, did not control the manner or means of Marzulli’s work, and fulfilled its staffing service duties by providing a qualified worker as requested

Metron Nutraceuticals, LLC v. Cook

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 19, 2023

“The party seeking attorney’s fees bears the burden of establishing entitlement to an award.” Yellowbook Inc. v. … Plaintiff’s claim for misappropriation of trade secrets failed because the generally known information at issue “d[id] not qualify as a trade secret.” (Id., PageID #7266.)

Office Max, Inc. v. United States

309 F. Supp. 2d 984 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 13, 2004

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. … On its face, that statute clearly requires that the charge vary in amount with both “distance and elapsed transmission time for each individual communication.”

Hendrickson v. Commissioner of Social Security

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

Jessica Hutchins wrote a short letter - to whom it may concern – stating that Hendrickson was being treated for Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, immune dysfunction, mycotoxin illness (chronic immune response syndrome), and dysbiosis … Hendrickson reported that her main complaint was that her “brain inside just shakes,” she could not think clearly, and “sometimes fatigue.” (Tr. 624-624).

Certain Underwriters at Lloyds, London Subscribing to Policy No. HMPL18-0164 and HMPL 17-0158 v. KG Administrative Services, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 12, 2019

Boggs established a two-pronged test for determining whether a misstatement qualifies as a warranty. Am. Family Ins. Co. v. Johnson, 8th Dist. No. 93022, 2010-Ohio-1855, 2010 WL 1712240, ¶ 16. … In reply, Underwriters argues that the “lawsuits clearly constitute ‘claims’ as the term is defined” in the Lloyd’s Policy. (Reply at 816.)

Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 24, 2025

(R. 45-2, PageID# 726, Decl. of Andrew Shepard at ¶5).3 Engineers hired after November 1, 1985—virtually all engineers—hold seniority both as Engineers and as Conductors, and “such employees who are qualified and hold seniority … In other words, while Plaintiff maintains Defendant’s practice violates the terms of the 2015 CBA, neither party points to any language in that agreement that clearly and unambiguously prohibits or allows such a practice

Saal v. City of Wooster

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 20, 2020

Individuals have a “clearly established right to be free from malicious prosecution.” King v. Harwood, 852 F.3d 568, 580 (6th Cir. 2017) (citing Webb v. United States, 789 F.3d 647, 660 (6th Cir. 2015)). … As an initial matter, Saal’s equal protection argument must fail because “no clearly established right exists under the equal protection clause to be free from retaliation.” Ratliff v.

Gilbo v. Agment, LLC.

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 14, 2020

and [ ] an additional equal amount as liquidated damages.” 29 U.S.C. § 216(b). 133 Doc. 17 at 23. 134 It is clearly … established that Defendants did not pay Plaintiffs anything.

In Re Welding Fume Products Liability Litigation

526 F. Supp. 2d 775 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 30, 2007

Since these studies are clearly in the range where manganese exposure begins to cause biological effects, there is considerable need for a new study which addresses past deficiencies and leads to a clearly established dose-response … Certainly, simple attendance at AWS meetings does not qualify as assistance or encouragement.

Kopp Development Inc. v. Metrasens, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 3, 2025

In order to establish a false-advertising claim under the Lanham Act, the plaintiff must establish the following five elements: “(1) the defendant has made false or misleading 9 … as an ‘establishment claim,’ which permits a plaintiff to prove literal falsity based on product testing.”

McDuffie v. Jackson-Mitchell

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 22, 2024

He contends that his “efforts [to seek review in the Supreme Court of Ohio] should . . . qualify as a full and fair opportunity to resolve the claims raised herein.” (Id. at p. 7.) … McDuffie has failed to establish sufficient cause to excuse his procedural default.

United States v. Russ

772 F. Supp. 2d 880 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 18, 2011

It is well-established that an officer may approach a citizen and “generally ask questions of that individual, ask to examine that individual’s identification, and request consent to search ... as long as the police do not … Despite Russ’s contentions to the contrary, the Court finds that, under the circumstances, this statement did not qualify as language “indicating that compliance with the officer’s request might be compelled.”

Local 860, AFL-CIO Laborers' International Union of North America v. Kokosing Construction Company, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 30, 2021

One of the main contentions in the I-271 Project Grievance was whether KCC qualified as a Traveling Contractor or Local Contractor as defined by the CBA. … When doing so, the term clearly excludes supervisory personnel. At the outset, Paragraph 3 contains two different terms: “Laborer Employee” and “Laborer.”