Case law

International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers - Transportation Division v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company

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

The Carrier therefore called and used an employee who was a qualified conductor, albeit that employee had previously left train service for work as a locomotive engineer.” Id. … In other words, while Plaintiffs maintain Defendant’s practice somehow violates the terms of the crew consist agreements, neither party points to any language in that agreement that clearly and unambiguously prohibits

Taylor v. University Hospitals of Cleveland Inc. OH.

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

She had been there in 2016 for a paraneoplastic autoantibody evaluation, which is a test that detects the body’s immune response to cancer. (Doc. 1-22). That test was negative for cancer. (Doc. 1-6). … To establish jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1) based on diversity of citizenship, the Plaintiff must establish that she is a citizen of one state and all of the Defendants are citizens of other states.

Trista Blake v. Dollar Bank

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 12, 2026

For purposes of Rule 12(b)(6), “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 entitled … According to Blake, her “Charge established her disabled status, request for accommodations, and termination shortly thereafter.” (Id. at PageID #171.)

Boggs v. City of Cleveland

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Apr 2, 2020

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 … To assert a claim under § 1983, Plaintiffs “must establish that: (1) a person acting under color of state law (2) deprived him of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States

Leach v. Dewine

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 30, 2024

This finality requirement generally “establishes a one-case, one-appeal rule.” Id. Still, under 28 U.S.C. § 1292, federal courts of appeals are granted jurisdiction to hear appeals of certain interlocutory orders. … They also do not involve any other kind of order that is immediately appealable of right, such as an order denying a claim of qualified immunity. See, e.g., Summers, 368 F.3d at 886.

Lazuka v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 17, 2025

Generally, these regulations are duplicates and establish the same analytical framework. … Lazuka argues that the evidence established he had experienced the requisite number of seizures to meet Listing 11.02A. (ECF Doc. 6, p. 15).

Fairview Radiology, P.C. v. Defiance Hospital, Inc.

413 F. Supp. 2d 874 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 2, 2005

abandoned the Agreement. “[5 ]ubsequent to the execution of a written contract, it is competent for the parties, by a new contract, although not in writing, either to abandon, waive, or annul, the prior contract, or vary, or qualify … Thurston clearly permits oral modifications of written agreements. Thus whether the Agreement was orally modified is a question of fact, and Dr. Ferguson is not entitled to summary judgment. 5 *884 B.

Hughes v. Toledo Area Regional Transit Authority

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 26, 2021

Plaintiff has failed to establish the necessary elements to satisfy a claim. … established in Cooper.

Wasilko v. United States

300 F. Supp. 573 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 17, 1967

He thought it was a four-engine airplane “because the engine exhaust showed up quite clearly at takeoff.” He saw it in the air above Runway 23L. … Stelljes, a pilot of 24 years, qualified and experienced in flying aircraft of various weights and types, who testified that he has flown planes which have encountered trailing vortices.

Fire-Dex, LLC v. Admiral Insurance Company and St. Paul Surplus Lines Insurance Company, et al.

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

This principle is especially powerful “when considering provisions that purport to limit or qualify coverage,” like exclusions. Id. … If an exclusion is at issue, courts will interpret that exclusion “as applying only to that which is clearly intended to be excluded.” Lager v.

Sovereign News Co. v. Falke

448 F. Supp. 306 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 31, 1977

“These precedents clearly establish that at least in the absence of ‘extraordinary circumstances’ federal courts must refuse to intervene in state criminal proceedings to suppress the use of evidence claimed to have been … See, discussion of the good faith qualified immunity of public officials from damage suits for constitutional torts, in O’Connor v. Donaldson, 422 U.S. 563, 577 , 95 S.Ct. 2486 , 45 L.Ed.2d 396 (1975); Wood v.

Farris v. Alliance Health Care Braeview, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 18, 2022

The staffing agency stops qualifying as the employee’s employer. The corporation was the employee’s “joint employer.” Now it is just her “employer.” Why? … See Dole, 942 F.2d at 966 (“In short, the evidence clearly demonstrates that Schubiner was the “top man” at Elliott Travel, and the corporation functioned for his profit . . .

P.I. & I. Motor Express, Inc. v. RLI Insurance Company

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Nov 9, 2020

Defendant would be entitled to summary judgment on all claims if it could establish that either exclusion applied to the undisputed facts of this case. … Finally, the Court notes that, in Ohio, Workers’ Compensation immunity does not arise exclusively from statute. See, e.g., O. Const. II Sec. 35.

Branning v. Romeo's Pizza, Inc.

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

Defendants argue that numerosity has not been established because “Dietrich does not offer any evidence to establish that any of the Defendants underpaid him, let alone that all delivery drivers were underpaid.” … Further, the court finds that Plaintiff’s counsel is qualified to represent the class, as several courts have recognized their expertise in pizza delivery driving wage and hour litigation.

Constantino v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 2, 2021

On February 22, 2016, Constantino received an intravenous immune globulin (“IVIG”) treatment. (Id. at 339.) … Ohio March 21, 2014) (finding “the ALJ has clearly articulated his reason for giving little weight to the opinion of Dr. Schmitt, that is, Dr.

Krupa v. Support for You, LLC

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

There is some authority suggesting that internal complaints do not qualify under FL SA.8 Nevertheless, the Sixth Circuit has described such a position as “clearly erroneous,” finding that informal complaints are sufficient … To establish a prima facie case of handicap discrimination under R.C. 4112.02(A), the party seeking relief must establish “(1) that he or she was handicapped, (2) that an adverse employment action was taken by an employer

Creely v. HCR ManorCare, Inc.

789 F. Supp. 2d 819 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 9, 2011

One district court in Kansas, in a situation where the parties had conducted three months of discovery and thirty individuals had filed opt-in consent forms, explained that plaintiffs were clearly beyond the “notice” stage … In order to meet this standard, plaintiffs “must simply ‘submit evidence establishing at least a colorable basis for their claim that a class of “similarly situated” plaintiffs exists’ ” and the court considers “whether potential

Lumpkin v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 6, 2021

Claimant asserts that “[t]he medical evidence from the relevant time period clearly established that Lumpkin had diabetic neuropathy” because, during her examinations, “it was noted that she had tingling [] and … The ALJ clearly articulated his findings and supported them with substantial evidence.

United States v. Delano

543 F. Supp. 2d 791 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 26, 2008

When determining what evidence should be excluded under the fruits doctrine, the Court asks “whether, granting establishment of the primary illegality, the evidence to which an objection is made has been come at by exploitation … The voluntariness test requires that consent qualify as voluntary under the Fifth Amendment, i.e., not result from coercion. Brown, 422 U.S. at 601-02, 95 S.Ct. 2254 .

Johnson v. Black

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

For the purposes of § 2254(d)(1), “clearly established Federal law” means “the governing legal principle or principles set forth by the Supreme Court at the time the state court renders its decision.” Lockyer v. … As noted in Ground Three, the two-part Strickland test is the clearly established federal law governing Mr. Johnson’s ineffective-assistance claims.