Case law

Burnette v. Wilkie

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 17, 2019

“It is well established that the burden is on an employment discrimination plaintiff to establish a prima facie case of discrimination.” Mitchell v. … an adverse employment action; (3) was qualified for her position; and (4) was replaced by a person from outside her protected class, or received different treatment than employees outside of the protected class for the

Obergefell v. Firelands Regional Medical Center

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

But a plaintiff cannot establish a prima facie case by merely “demonstrat[ing] that younger persons were retained in other jobs which the plaintiff was qualified to perform.” Id. at 1465. … See, e.g., Barnes, 896 F.2d at 1469 (“This Circuit has clearly established that an employer has no duty under ADEA to permit an employee to transfer to another position or to displace workers with less seniority when the

DeVore v. May

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 24, 2023

Counsel declining to raise an issue on appeal only amounts to deficient performance where the issue he failed to raise is clearly stronger than the claims actually raised. Id. … Based on this standard, Petitioner does not qualify for a certificate of eligibility.

Washington v. Cool

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 29, 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 … Based on this standard, Petitioner does not qualify for a certificate of appealability.

Jackson v. Cuyahoga County

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

Plaintiffs seek to establish two subclasses. (Id. at ¶ 23.) … Because the Court dismisses all claims with prejudice against Mills, the Court need not decide whether he is entitled to qualified immunity.

Picard

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Nov 4, 2025

“Clearly established Federal law for purposes of § 2254(d)(1) includes only the holdings, as opposed to the dicta, of [the Supreme] Court's decisions.” White v. … Picard has not shown that the Fifth Appellate District’s ruling was contrary to or unreasonably applied clearly established law, and Mr.

Bruce v. Commissioner of the Social Security

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

A condition must first qualify as a “medically determinable impairment” before the ALJ determines whether it is “severe.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1521. … And whether a condition qualifies as a “medically determinable impairment” is determined exclusively on the basis of objective medical evidence. Id.

United States v. Liberatore

846 F. Supp. 569 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 10, 1994

Yet; at the time of trial, the record clearly indicates that counsel did not raise any concern relating to the defendant’s mental health. … The substantive evidence of the overt acts underlying the racketeering charge were, in large part, established through those recordings.

Bell v. Toledo Gaming Ventures, LLC

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 30, 2023

Under McDonnell Douglas, the plaintiff first must establish a prima facie case. Id. … A prima facie case of race or sex discrimination requires a plaintiff to show: (1) she is a member of protected class; (2) she was qualified for the position; (3) she was subject to an adverse employment action; and (4)

Keller North America, Inc. v. Earl

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

Again, Keller clearly pleaded the existence of a relationship between Earl and Michels. The extent of that relationship remains unknown. Is it an employee merely preparing for new employment? … At this stage, Keller alleged enough facts for the Court to reasonably infer that such business opportunities could qualify as trade secrets under OUTSA.

Miley v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 22, 2021

“If, however, the record raises a substantial question as to whether the claimant could qualify as disabled under a listing, the ALJ should discuss that listing.” … But the evidence related to her chest and groin wounds is insufficient to establish the durational or the severity criteria for Listing 8.04.

W6 Restaurant Group, Ltd v. Guzman

District Court, N.D. Ohio · May 3, 2024

The Chaney court interpreted Dunlop in the same way: it explained that the statute in Dunlop “quite clearly withdrew discretion from the agency and provided guidelines for exercise of its enforcement power.” … Eligible entities who received grants from the RRF were required to use those funds for qualifying expenses during the “covered period.” § 9009c(c)(6).

Cunningham v. Hudson

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 18, 2019

“Qualified jurors need not . . . be totally ignorant of the facts and issues involved.” Murphy, 421 U.S. at 799- 800. … The evidence does not clearly show that there was even a real relationship between Mikesell and the victims’ families.

Stewart v. Sheldon

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Apr 29, 2022

established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States; or (2) resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State … Ohio May 14, 2010) (refusing to address petitioner’s objections because they “[amounted] to approximately ten pages of text lifted verbatim from [petitioner]'s Traverse” and thus do not qualify as objections”); Potter,

Williams v. Warden James Haviland

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 19, 2024

“The state court’s application of clearly established law must be objectively unreasonable.” Id. … “The state court’s application of clearly established law must be objectively unreasonable.” Id. Second, under § 2254(d)(2), when a petitioner like Mr.

Boyd v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Apr 9, 2025

The ALJ need not “‘address every listing’ or ‘to discuss listings that the applicant clearly does not meet.’” Smith-Johnson v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 579 F.App’x 426, 432 (6th Cir. 2014) (quoting Sheeks v. … 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.”

Pratt v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 8, 2021

While the RFC is for the ALJ to determine, however, it is well established that the claimant bears the burden of establishing the impairments that determine his RFC. See Her v. Comm'r of Soc. … Ohio July 1, 2019) (“Plaintiff’s own hearing testimony does not qualify as medical documentation and is insufficient to establish that her cane usage was medically required”).

Nimrod v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 21, 2021

If the ALJ intended to find that there was no medical evidence that Plaintiff suffered from seizures or similar symptoms, other than his subjective statements to medical personnel, the ALJ did not clearly do so and explain … This conclusion amounts to an impermissible medical judgment that neither the ALJ nor the court is qualified to make. The ALJ points to no medical source who makes this conclusion.

D'AMBROSIO v. Bagley

619 F. Supp. 2d 428 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Apr 27, 2009

A Habeas Court May Bar Re-prosecution in Extraordinary Circumstances While the circumstances under which it may do so are not clearly defined, whether a district court is permitted to bar a state’s reprosecution of a habeas … Apr.5, 1999) (“[Sjtate proceedings need do no more than satisfy the minimum procedural requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause in order to qualify for the full faith and credit guaranteed by federal

North Olmsted Chamber of Commerce v. City of North Olmsted

86 F. Supp. 2d 755 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 21, 2000

All sign lettering must be “clearly legible and in scale with the sign surface upon which it is placed.” Ord. § 1163.04(k). … A fee for the permit is established by separate ordinance. Ord. § 1163.16(b).