Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
2,217 results
1.43s
Advance Wire Forming, Inc. v. Stein
District Court, N.D. Ohio · May 16, 2022
Even if this evidence did qualify as Rule 404(b) evidence, Plaintiffs maintain that it is admissible to show that Stein had motive for trying to discredit Ms. … Taylor is not relevant to establishing any of the elements of these claims. See, e.g., Marotta v. Ford Motor Co., 2016 WL 3197425 at * 7 (E.D. Mich.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 30, 2023
A prima facie case of race or sex discrimination requires a plaintiff to show she: (1) is a member of protected class; (2) was qualified for the position; (3) was subject to an adverse employment action; and (4) similarly … Jobe cites to no evidence to support her conclusory statement that her prior lawsuit was “clearly the cause” of her 2018 discipline involving the verbal altercation with Hollis, rather than her own behavior. (Doc.
Cited 0 timesUnknownWillis v. Commissioner of Social Security
District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 10, 2024
On April 4, 2023, an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) denied Willis’s application after determining that Willis’s medically determinable impairments, considered individually or in combination, did not qualify as a disability … As Magistrate Judge Clay correctly observed, the Sixth Circuit has clearly established that “an ALJ is not required to base her RFC determination on a particular medical opinion.” (Doc.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 8, 2020
And the Court found “Farmer fails to establish any reason that justifies his failure to raise his Brady claim on direct appeal.” (Id. at 1224.) … The importance of filing a praecipe is clearly conveyed to potential appellants in Local App.
Cited 0 timesUnknown920 F. Supp. 2d 810 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 29, 2013
means at its disposal, including direct sales contracts through personal calls to specifying engineers, dealers, contractors, and stocking distributors. ii) Maintain, at its own cost and expense, a sufficient number of qualified … In addition, we will look to the plain and ordinary meaning of the language used in the contract unless another meaning is clearly apparent from the contents of the agreement.
Cited 5 timesPublishedGrand v. City of University Heights, Ohio
District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 1, 2024
Among those buildings or uses that may qualify for a SUP are: “(1) Houses of worship . . . including . . . synagogues[.]” UHCO § 1274.01(b)(1). UHCO does not define houses of worship. … Under well-settled law, the Fourth Amendment does not “preclude an officer’s observations from a public vantage point where he has a right to be and which renders the activities clearly visible.” California v.
Cited 0 timesUnknown1 F. Supp. 2d 705 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 27, 1998
District policy relating to the nondiscriminatory use of testing procedures, administration, and scoring aids in the determination of whether a student qualifies for Title 1 services. (Vol.VI, 1229-30). 206. … The Court concludes that the record clearly establishes that the District’s financial condition demanded that many reductions be made and that some forecasted programs be delayed.
Cited 6 timesPublishedArends v. Family Solutions of Ohio, Inc.
District Court, N.D. Ohio · Apr 5, 2021
No. 142-1.) 2 This position is currently referred to as “Qualified Behavioral Health Specialists.” … Plaintiffs assert that, even if there are some individualized damages issues, the liability issues clearly predominate and warrant certification. (Id.)
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 30, 2022
The first exception is triggered when a state court issues “‘a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court[.]’” … Lett, 559 U.S. 766, 773 (2010) (“[A] federal habeas court may not issue the writ simply because that court concludes in its independent judgment that the relevant state-court decision applied clearly established federal
Cited 0 timesUnknownGrand v. City of University Heights, Ohio
District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 30, 2024
Among those buildings or uses that may qualify for a SUP are: “(1) Houses of worship . . . including . . . synagogues[.]” UHCO § 1274.01(b)(1). UHCO does not define houses of worship. … Under well-settled law, the Fourth Amendment does not “preclude an officer’s observations from a public vantage point where he has a right to be and which renders the activities clearly visible.” California v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownYounker v. Board of Education of the Lorain City School District
District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 5, 2020
The well-pleaded complaint rule is clearly irrelevant in these circumstances, and Younker cites no support for her contention that merely because a novel issue of state law is involved in a defense, it cannot support a … “[I]n an FMLA retaliation case . . . if the plaintiff does not qualify as an ‘eligible employee,’ the plaintiff does not state a claim for relief under the FMLA.” Humenny v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownMassey v. Commissioner of Social Security
District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 30, 2025
On examination, K.L. was “alert and clearly well oriented.” (Tr. 285.) Her behavior was generally cooperative and age-appropriate, although she sometimes interrupted or rushed through instructions. (Id.) … To qualify, a child recipient must also meet certain income and resource limitations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.1100, 416.1201.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 2, 2023
“As for liability, the victim must show that his abuser violated a qualifying criminal statute.” Id. … The court noted that “[s]quarely applicable to this case is the principle of federal maritime law that a cruise line is strictly liable for a crew member’s assault of a passenger,” a principle clearly established by two
Cited 0 timesUnknownSanchez v. Commissioner of Social Security
District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 15, 2025
Sanchez’s daily activities does not clearly contradict his complaints. … The ALJ qualified the explanation that it was not one particular treatment note but the ALJ’s impression of “the longitudinal record does not reflect a significant degree of functional limitation.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownGarrett v. Morgan County Sheriff's Office
District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 10, 2024
The plaintiff argued that the intra-military immunity doctrine announced in Feres v. … Defendants moved to dismiss on the basis of the FCA’s intramilitary immunity provision. Id. at 260.
Cited 0 timesUnknownGard v. Grand River Rubber & Plastics Company
District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 20, 2021
Courts have considered later sworn affidavits where such affidavits supplement “potentially ambiguous or incomplete testimony” or address an issue that was not thoroughly or clearly explored in deposition. … “A plaintiff's burden in establishing a prima facie case is not intended to be an onerous one.” Majewski v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 18, 2025
This was clearly a thorough assessment of Dr. Diethelm’s examination notes. … Clearly the ALJ articulated exactly how he assessed the consistency of Dr.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · Nov 27, 2019
Independent review of Sultaana’s other activities before this court and the Sixth Circuit also does not clearly indicate three strikes justifying revocation of Sultaana’s IFP status. … CareSource, 576 F.3d 551, 560 (6th Cir. 2009) (“Conclusory statements unadorned with supporting facts are insufficient to establish a factual dispute . . .”).
Cited 0 timesUnknownRobinson v. Commissioner of Social Security
District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 23, 2023
To qualify, a child recipient must also meet certain income and resource limitations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.1100, 416.1201. … Robinson has not made a direct, developed, or clearly articulated challenge to the finding that this opinion was “less persuasive”; any such challenge is waived. See McPherson v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 30, 2024
Section 20 of the TOU, titled “Disputes & Arbitration; Applicable Law,” provides: EXCEPT FOR DISPUTES THAT QUALIFY FOR SMALL CLAIMS COURT, ALL DISPUTES … Plaintiff argues that his claims should be construed as based exclusively on in-store transactions and that the TOU does not clearly cover in-store transactions. (Doc. 22 at 307.)
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna