Case law

Bennett v. Lopeman

598 F. Supp. 774 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 4, 1984

He clearly could not challenge his ability to appeal until the Board had issued its decision and mailed out its notice. … It is established that in most instances the U.S. mails can be “reasonably calculated” to notify an individual.

Davis v. Watkins

384 F. Supp. 1196 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 9, 1974

A record of any seizures, illnesses, treatments, immunizations. s. … Such exits should be clearly indicated with appropriate signs and illuminated at night.

Gallagher

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 25, 2026

Federal Claims “Government officials enjoy qualified immunity from suit under § 1983 unless their conduct violates clearly established law.” Zorn v. … Excessive Force Defendants argue that Officer Jeffries is entitled to qualified immunity because Plaintiff cannot show that he violated a clearly established constitutional

Cole

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

But the “inquiry into whether a pretrial detainee has raised a viable deliberate indifference claim is distinct from the analysis of whether a defendant violated clearly established law for purposes of qualified immunity … immunity defense ‘through the lens of the federal qualified immunity analysis.’”

Phillips v. May

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 13, 2023

Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … The law relating to qualified immunity is well established and involves a two-prong test.

Baumgold Bros., Inc. v. Allan M. Fox Co.-East

336 F. Supp. 175 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 19, 1972

As Professor Moore clearly states: “Even in Tucker Act cases the problem of joinder should not be embarrassed by any doctrine of sovereign immunity.” 3 Moore, Federal Practice, p. 20.07(3), 2864-2869. … While sitting as a court of claims, it is well established, this Court is precluded from holding a jury trial. McElrath v. United States, supra; Williams v.

City of Cleveland v. Ameriquest Mortgage Securities, Inc.

621 F. Supp. 2d 513 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · May 15, 2009

Nor does the City’s suggestion that its lawsuit does not qualify as regulation because it does not establish “a detailed, comprehensive, independent code of lender conduct” hold any merit. … But the fact that the law generally allows the ownership and use of trash receptacles did not immunize any of the defendants from liability.

General Tire & Rubber Co. v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.

349 F. Supp. 333 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 21, 1972

To establish patent misuse, it is enough to show the exist *342 ence of a restrictive agreement which tends to suppress competition in .unpatented goods. Morton Salt v. … In Hazeltine, the Court found the purpose of the provision was to establish a reasonable royalty base.

Pittman v. Cuyahoga Valley Career Center

451 F. Supp. 2d 905 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 25, 2006

As an arm of the State, CVCC is immune from claims brought by Pittman pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . CVCC’s immunity stems from the State’s Eleventh Amendment immunity. … The statistics, however, clearly indicate that there were eight African-American teachers— full-time and substitutes — employed by CVCC during the 2003-2004 school year.

Saxe v. United States

577 F. Supp. 135 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 19, 1983

Tucker, a well-qualified neurologist, did testify at trial that he believed Mr. Saxe was suffering from a GBS variant. Dr. … The Swine Flu Act provides in pertinent part as follows: The Secretary is authorized to establish, conduct and support (by grant or contract) needed activities to carry out a national swine flu immunization program until

Davis v. Bowerman

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

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … When a state actor raises a qualified immunity defense, it becomes the plaintiff’s burden to show that qualified immunity does not apply. Garretson v.

Rankin v. United States

578 F. Supp. 840 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 12, 1983

See In Re Swine Flu Immunization Products Liability Litigation, Pinal Pretrial Order, MDL Docket No. 30, Misc. No. 78-0040 (D.D.C.1979). … Tucker’s diagnosis was based on a 45-minute examination which took place over four years after Plaintiffs condition arose, and was notably qualified in attributing Plaintiffs condition to either a mononeuritic form of GBS

Lemke v. Bullinger

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

In response to a § 1983 claim, a defendant may assert the doctrine of qualified immunity as a defense. … “Qualified immunity shields federal and state officials from money damages unless a plaintiff pleads facts showing (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly

Raycom National, Inc. v. Campbell

361 F. Supp. 2d 679 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 4, 2004

In considering whether the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity on the plaintiffs First Amendment retaliation claim, the court concluded that at the time of the alleged retaliation, “Supreme Court and. … Sixth Circuit precedent had clearly established that retaliation aimed at chilling fundamental rights was improper.” Id. at 461.

Carnahan v. McClure

29 F. Supp. 3d 1044 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 11, 2014

Defendants have raised the affirmative defense of qualified immunity. 2 In determining whether the officers used excessive force, I take the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff but also from the perspective … I do not reach the issue of qualified immunity under either federal or state law, as I conclude that no rational jury could find that the force the officers used violated either the federal Constitution or state tort law.

Andre Williams v. City of Willoughby, et al.

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 15, 2026

Qualified Immunity – Inappropriate for resolution at pleading stage where factual disputes exist. 4. … Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint, in whole or in part, is barred by qualified immunity. (Doc.

Estate of Derrick Smith, et al. v. United States of America

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

defense through the lens of the federal qualified immunity analysis.” … Though adjudication of qualified immunity is regularly reserved for summary judgment, courts “cannot defer a decision on qualified immunity merely because it must make the decision on a Rule 12 motion.”

Abdoo v. Ray

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 9, 2021

Did the Excessive Force Violate a Clearly Established Right? Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability unless the right they violated was clearly established. Pearson, 555 U.S. at 231. … Thus, based on the facts presented by Abdoo, Ray’s qualified immunity defense fails as well: his knee drop violated Abdoo’s right to be free from excessive force, and that right was clearly established.

Schroeder v. Maumee Bd. of Educ.

296 F. Supp. 2d 869 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 8, 2003

I note at the outset that defendants, government officials and entities, have not asserted qualified immunity to plaintiff's claims. … Normally the court’s analysis would follow the qualified immunity framework, but because it is not asserted by defendants, I will instead address each of plaintiffs claims under the standard summary judgment framework. 3

United States v. Royal Geropsychiatric Services, Inc.

8 F. Supp. 2d 690 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 2, 1998

[W]e see no reason to allow claimants to proceed against private agencies when they clearly cannot proceed against federal agencies. 903 F.2d at 487-88. … This is a waiver of sovereign immunity for those actions specified in the Act.