Case law

Undiandeye v. Jackson

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 22, 2019

He claims Assistant Prosecutors Gatti and Riley, along with his attorney Brown-O’Neal, are denying him a speedy trial. … See Roberts v. City of Troy, 773 F.2d 720, 723 (6th Cir.1985) (citing Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 545 (1979)). The Supreme Court in Wilson v.

Johnson v. Dana Corp.

236 F.R.D. 349 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · May 24, 2006

Compare In re Veeco Instruments, Inc., 233 F.R.D. 330, 332-33 (S.D.N.Y.2005) (applying FIFO) (citing Thompson v. … Here, the parties dispute the soundness of LIFO v. FIFO. Each party endorses a methodology that enhances its respective claim to lead plaintiff status. 1. FIFO v.

Kerr v. Pollex

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 27, 2022

Henderson v. Walled Lake Consol. Sch., 469 F.3d 479, 496 (6th Cir. 2006). Kerr again argues that, pursuant to Twin City Fire Insurance Co. v. … No. 26 at 11 (citing Browning v. Pendleton, 869 F.2d 989, 991 (6th Cir. 1989))).

Huffman v. SmithKline Beecham Clinical Laboratories, Inc.

111 F. Supp. 2d 921 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 20, 2000

Wojcik v. … Huffman’s treating physician and is an experienced medical doctor who is board certified in the sub-speciality of medical oncology.

Cook v. Springfield Township

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 28, 2023

See generally Brown v. VHS of Michigan, Inc., 545 Fed. App’x 368, 372 (6th Cir. 2013); see also Hicks v. Concorde Career Coll., 449 Fed. App’x 484, 487 (6th Cir. 2011). … Ward v. Cnty. of Cuyahoga, 721 F. Supp. 2d 677, 694 (N.D. Ohio 2010) (citation and quotations omitted); see also Brown v. Whirlpool, 996 F. Supp. 2d 623, 643 (N.D.

Patterson v. Central Mills, Inc.

112 F. Supp. 2d 681 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 21, 2000

. § 1345.02) (citing Lintermoot v. Brown, 1988 WL 80492 (Ohio App. Aug.2, 1988)). Accordingly, I shall grant Central Mills’s motion for summary judgment on plaintiffs’ claims under the OCSPA. II. Warner A. … Van Waters & Rogers, Inc., 12 F.Supp.2d 672, 680-681 (N.D.Ohio 1998) (“some form of express conduct by the seller [is required] to maintain a cause of action based on a supplier’s misrepresentation”); Brown v.

Wooden v. Chambers-Smith

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 12, 2025

See Brown v. Matauszak, 415 F. … See Brown, 415 F. App’x at 615; cf. LaFountain v.

Gomez v. City of Canton Police Department

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

.; see also Fam. of LaMonte Brown, Jr. v. Montgomery Cnty., Ohio, Sheriff’s Dep’t, No. 3:23-cv-182, 2024 WL 199883, at *3 (S.D. Ohio Jan. 18, 2024) (same); Elkins v. … App’x 222, 225 (6th Cir. 2005); Browning v. Pendleton, 869 F.2d 989, 992 (6th Cir. 1989) (citing Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.10). As to when the clock begins to run, federal law controls. See Hornback, 543 F. App’x at 501.

Davie v. Mitchell

291 F. Supp. 2d 573 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 4, 2003

Brown, described petitioner’s developmental history as “rather benign.” That assessment, petitioner contends, was inaccurate, and Dr. Brown’s evaluation was incomplete. … Brown, also testified on Davie’s behalf. Dr.

Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers v. United States

217 F. Supp. 98 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · May 2, 1963

Plaintiffs argue, however, that upon the holding of Riss & Company v. … Transportation Co. v. United States, 180 F.Supp. 732 (D.Neb., 1960); Canadian Pacific Ry. Co. v. United States, 158 F.Supp. 248 (D.C.1958); Colorado Interstate Gas Co. v.

Hockenberry v. Village of Carrollton

110 F. Supp. 2d 597 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 3, 2000

See Brower v. … See Hafner v. Brown, 983 F.2d 570, 577 (4th Cir.1992); Hooks v.

Doe 1 v. Bedford City School District

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 17, 2022

: Plaintiffs, : : ORDER & OPINON v … : [Resolving Doc. 14] : BEDFORD CITY SCHOOL : DISTRICT BOARD OF

Person v. Newland

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 24, 2019

Browning v. Pendleton, 869 F.2d 989, 992 (6th Cir. 1989) (en banc). The “limitations period starts to run ‘when the plaintiff knows or has reason to know of the injury which is the basis of his action.’” … Kuhnle Bros., Inc. v. Cty. Of Geauga, 103 F.3d 516, 520 (6" Cir. 1997) (quoting Sevier v.

Corpus v. Aim Leasing Company

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 24, 2021

See Doc. 39, at 17; Brown v. VHS of Michigan, Inc., 545 F. … Meyers v. Goodrich Corp., 2011-Ohio-3261, ¶ 13 (Ohio Ct. App.). Protected activity includes both participation and opposition. Brown v. O’Reilly Auto. Stores, Inc., 54 N.E.3d 638, 647 (Ohio Ct. App.).

J.L. Spoons, Inc. v. O'Connor

194 F.R.D. 589 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 5, 2000

Spoons, Inc. v. Brown, 40 F.Supp.2d 902, 905-07 (N.D.Ohio 1999). The defendants cover no new territory in their recent pleadings; indeed, they merely restate the arguments they proffered previously. … See City of Cleveland v.

United States v. McCullough

891 F. Supp. 422 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 22, 1995

United States v. … LaForce, 214 Va. 438 , 201 S.E.2d 768, 769 (1974) (reference to ginseng as “a woodland herb reputed to have medicinal qualities”); Campbell Brown & Co., Inc. v.

Haddon v. City of Cleveland

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 30, 2022

Nothing in the City's Ordinances authorizes the Board to grant monetary relief and the City does not argue, nor did the court find, that the Board had the ability to grant monetary relief. … Teamsters Local Union 436 v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Commrs., 132 Ohio St.3d 47 (2012). In Parratt v.

Preformed Line Products Co. v. Fanner Manufacturing Co.

225 F. Supp. 762 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · May 17, 1962

Co. v. … Brown and Orval E. Wells in proof of paragraphs 11 through 17 above which were served on' defendant and filed on July 27, 1961, are uncontroverted. 19.

Brumbach v. Smith

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 21, 2025

Brown v. Chapman, 814 F.3d 436, 442–43 (6th Cir. 2016) (quoting Morse v. McWhorter, 290 F.3d 795, 800 (6th Cir. 2002)). … Coley v. Lucas Cnty., Ohio, 799 F.3d 530 (6th Cir. 2015) (citing Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 396 (1989)).

Collins v. Ohio Department of Transportation, District 11

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 9, 2024

Brown, stating “FYI.” (Id.; ECF Doc. 38 (“Brown Depo.”), pp. 27:23-28:16.) Mr. Brown did not recall discussions with Mr. Johnson following his receipt of the email. (Brown Depo., p. 28:17-19.) c. … Passenger Corp. v.