Case law

Fender

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 30, 2026

To establish the first predicate, the petitioner “must identify a ‘clearly established’ principle of ‘Federal law’ that” has been established by a holding of the Supreme Court. Fields v. … “[A] ‘clearly established’ principle of ‘Federal law’ refers to the “holdings,” not “dicta,” of the Supreme Court’s decisions. Fields, 86 F.4th at 231 (quoting White, 572 U.S. at 419).

Sander

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

Here, the late fee clearly fails prong one of the Samson Sales test because damages for failure to pay the note by its due date are easily ascertainable. … Accordingly, the note “does not qualify as a ‘short-term loan’ subject to the requirements of the STLA.” Id.

Mackey v. National Steel Corp.

292 F. Supp. 222 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 1, 1967

The contentions of the parties, conflicting in the pleadings, emerged more clearly during the trial and oral argument. … In addition, the evidence must establish that the plaintiff has not yet reached maximum medical recovery or improvement. Dr.

Murnahan v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Nov 30, 2020

a claimant is “surprised” by testimony at the hearing only applies to limited circumstances and not to every hearing.69 As the Commissioner observes, under Murnahan’s definition of “surprise” every hearing would qualify … absent any specific evidence to the contrary, such as when a claimant makes an on the record request at the hearing to hold the hearing open for post-hearing brief detailing his objection to the VE’s testimony and the ALJ clearly

Poulton v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 27, 2023

SLS does not dispute that RFI #1 qualifies as a QWR for purposes of the RESPA, and the Poultons do not aver that SLS’ substantive response was untimely. … However, the complaint clearly alleges that SLS “falsely represent[ed]” that the Poultons owed an undisclosed balloon payment upon the maturity of the Loan. (Doc. No. 1 ¶ 118.)

Scott v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 15, 2023

“An impairment that manifests only some of those criteria, no matter how severely, does not qualify.” Sullivan v. Zebley, 493 U.S. 521, 530 (1990). … The Sixth Circuit, however, has also emphasized that “the ALJ need not discuss listings that the applicant clearly does not meet.” Sheeks v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 544 Fed. Appx 639, 641 (6th Cir. 2013).

McGowan v. United States

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 25, 2023

McGowan”) established his current dental practice, Plaintiff Peter E. McGowan DDS, Inc. (“the Company”), in 1994; it is taxed as a C corporation, and he is its sole shareholder. (Doc. 37, at 5). … Such amounts are clearly above the statutory threshold for classification as a “substantial understatement”, and Dr.

Shrader

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 14, 2026

The video does not clearly show Shrader exiting the gym to go to Talkington’s room. Nor does it clearly show when she returns to the gym after getting 15 This footage is authenticated via an Affidavit from Blair. … and even if she could, she cannot establish employer liability.”

Hildawn Design, LLC v. Right Here at Home, LLC

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

But here, the pleadings clearly show there is no general jurisdiction. … “The qualified property rights in such names and marks and the right to protection thereof arise as a matter of common law, not as a matter of statute.” Id.

Leflore v. Commissioner of Social Security

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

To qualify, a child recipient must also meet certain income and resource limitations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.1100, 416.1201. … “was fidgety upon examination” and “no more than marginally cooperative” and “that rapport was difficult to establish.” (Id.).

Zellia v. Kohl's Department Stores, Inc.

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

To establish a prima facie case of gender discrimination, Zellia must show that he: “1) is within a protected class; 2) suffered an adverse employment action; 3) was qualified for his position; and 4) was replaced by someone … But Ruffing clearly testified at his deposition that there was no such discretion and that he never made any such statement with respect to the 100-foot rule, although he had discussed discretion in other areas. (Doc.

Harris v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 27, 2021

The Court stated, “neither the listings nor the Sixth Circuit require the ALJ to address every listing or to discuss listings that the applicant clearly does not meet.” Id. … An impairment that manifests only some of the criteria, no matter how severely, does not qualify.”); Foster v.

Miku v. Gray

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 7, 2022

The state court’s determinations shall not be disturbed unless the adjudication of the claim resulted in a decision that was: (1) contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established … Petitioner would not have been able to establish a prima facie case of insanity under Ohio law.

Conteers LLC v. City of Akron, Summit County, Ohio

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 15, 2020

Thus, Conteers clearly had the right to appeal the City Council’s decision. … Thus, when a party establishes a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of its First Amendment claim, “it also has established the possibility of irreparable harm as a result of the deprivation of the claimed free

Tyus v. McConahay

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

was adjudicated on the merits in State court proceedings unless the adjudication of the claim – (1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly … Accordingly, Petitioner’s general objections and broad arguments do not qualify as objections, but the Court construes them as such and considers the merits of his arguments. II.A.

Venzke v. Black Stone of Northwest Ohio, LLC

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 26, 2019

Id.And I must “look to the plain and ordinary meaning of the language used in the [contract] unless another meaning is clearly apparent[.]” … Nor is there merit to Venzke’s argument that the Workers’ Compensation claims donot qualify as a “pending Proceeding” against NRC.

Sack

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Apr 6, 2026

On March 31, 2023, Sack established care with Geore Baker, NP, who primarily treated her for her diabetes mellitus, while continuing her Cymbalta prescription. (Tr. 774). … Generally, these regulations are duplicates and establish the same analytical framework.

Robertson v. University of Akron School of Law

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 20, 2021

Isolated remarks involving verbal harassment or rude behavior do not establish a constitutional violation. Logue v. United States Marshals, No. 1:13-cv-348, 2013 WL 3983215, at *4 (S.D. … “Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act provides that a qualified individual with a disability shall not, ‘solely by reason of his or her disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits

Skil Corp. v. Lucerne Products, Inc.

489 F. Supp. 1129 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 22, 1980

Rule 53(e)(2) provides that “the court-shall accept the master’s findings of fact unless clearly erroneous.” … The outer scope of the doctrine has not been clearly defined, see McCullough Tool Company v.

Lathan

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 10, 2026

First, clearly established federal law for purposes of AEDPA review includes “the holdings, as opposed to dicta, of [U.S. Supreme Court] decisions.” Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 412 (2000). … However, a state court does not act contrary to clearly established federal law where U.S. Supreme Court precedent is ambiguous or otherwise unavailable. See, e.g., Mitchell v.