Case law

Stevenson v. Willis

579 F. Supp. 2d 913 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 18, 2008

The issue in those cases was whether Ohio’s immunity statute, O.R.C. § 2744.02, which provides immunity to a political subdivision for actions involving employees in the course of their governmental functions, applied equally … nothing in the Housing Act or the Brooke Amendment evidences that Congress intended to preclude petitioners’ § 1983 claim” and “the benefits Congress intended to confer on tenants are sufficiently specific and definite to qualify

Davison v. City of Lorain

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 5, 2024

Additionally, City Defendants assert that Davison’s claims against Riley and Santiago should be dismissed because they are entitled to absolute immunity or, alternatively, qualified immunity, and 7 Davison’s Complaint … Mich. 2008). 12 In City Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, the individual City Defendants assert prosecutorial immunity and qualified immunity, which are defenses available only to individuals sued in their individual capacities

McBean v. United States

147 F. Supp. 2d 820 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Apr 25, 2001

H* H* ‡ H< H* * In concluding the photos and numerous miscellaneous documents that the Government seized is clearly acknowledged and documented. … Federal courts do not have jurisdiction over suits against the United States unless Congress, by statute, expressly waives sovereign immunity. 4 *826 Rule 41(e) is a rule of criminal procedure, not a statutory waiver of immunity

Gosche v. Calvert High School

997 F. Supp. 867 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 15, 1998

Therefore, she must establish her case by indirect or circumstantial evidence. … The liability clearly does not extend to mere insults, indignities, threats, annoyances, petty oppressions, or other trivialities.

White v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 26, 2024

ODRC is clearly a state agency and entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity. Accordingly, White’s claim against ODRC must be dismissed. 2. … App’x 165, 169 (6th Cir. 2004) (“[T]he assertion of a qualified-immunity defense (even a contingent qualified-immunity defense) indicates that the defendants were aware they could be held personally liable[.]”).

Card v. City of Cleveland

270 F.R.D. 280 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 30, 2010

Card clearly argues that the “[t]est results are meaningless” in Cleveland’s hiring and promotion decisions [dkt. 24, at 4]. … Cleveland is wrong when it contends that Card must prove that she was the "most" qualified for the WPO I position in order to establish a prima facie case of discrimination.

Hughes v. University Hospitals

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 6, 2025

The causes of action in the Complaint are not clearly delineated, but the Court construes the Complaint as raising the following against the Ohio Defendants:! … Halderman, 465 U.S. 89, 89-90 (1984).2 In Ex parte Young, the Supreme Court established an exception to the Eleventh Amendment immunity for claims for injunctive relief against individual state officials in their official

Parsai v. The University of Toledo

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

A government official performing a discretionary function is immune from a civil suit for money damages if the official’s “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … at issue in the case was “clearly established” at the time the defendant acted.

Sampson v. City of Cleveland

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 20, 2020

constitutional right at issue was clearly established at the time of defendant’s alleged misconduct. … The constitutional right must be “so clearly established at the time in question that a reasonable person in the defendant’s position would have known that he was violating the plaintiff’s constitutional rights.”

Wallace

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 20, 2026

It is well established that judicial officers are generally entitled to absolute immunity from civil suits for money damages. Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 9 (1991); Barnes v. … Nor is there any suggestion that they acted clearly outside of the subject matter jurisdiction of the court over which they preside.

Singer v. Montefiore

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

Immunity under the PREP Act The Act provides immunity for a covered person under federal and State law for all claims that relate to the use of authorized countermeasures. … Qualified Pandemic or Epidemic Product The Act defines a “qualified pandemic or epidemic product” as a drug, a biological product, or a device. Id. at § 247d-6d(i)(7).

Simmons-Harris v. Zelman

72 F. Supp. 2d 834 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 20, 1999

It is now clearly established that not every law which confers a benefit on a religious institution violates the Constitution. … Parents clearly benefitted under the Nyquist program, as they do here.

Nighswander v. Henderson

172 F. Supp. 2d 951 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 5, 2001

that he or she is “disabled.” 3 2) The plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that he or she is “otherwise qualified” for the position despite his or her disability: a) without accommodation from the employer; b) with … Defendant argues: 1) plaintiff is not otherwise qualified for the job she seeks; and 2) plaintiff failed to establish that similarly situated employees were treated differently. 6 *959 1.

O'Donnell v. Yezzo

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 2, 2023

Qualified immunity shields state officials from a § 1983 damages action, where the official’s conduct “does not violate clearly established [law] which a reasonable person would have known” at the time. Pearson v. … Qualified Immunity While she invokes the defense of qualified immunity in her Motion for Summary Judgment, Yezzo never explains its application to Plaintiff’s Brady theories.

Lesowitz v. Brown

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 2, 2020

True, defendants mention qualified immunity in various headings and subheadings throughout their summary judgment motion. … The issue of whether defendants waived qualified immunity is separate from whether defendants should be permitted to file an answer.

Maxwell v. GTE Wireless Service Corp.

121 F. Supp. 2d 649 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Nov 21, 2000

Regarding the first element, Maxwell has produced evidence sufficient to establish that his depression was chronic and severe, qualifying as a disability under the ADA. … Moreover, as noted in the previous section, *662 the evidence clearly establishes that GTE violated neither promise. Consequently, this Court grants GTE’s motion for summary judgment on this claim. H.

Jordan v. Summit County, Ohio and Summit County Board of Commissioners

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 10, 2020

Defendants argue that Defendant Trunko is entitled to qualified immunity. … “[Q]ualified immunity shields officials from civil liability if their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” Richmond v.

Goodykoontz v. Cuyahoga County

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 17, 2024

, presidential immunity, executive privilege, absolute immunity, qualified immunity and United Nations immunity. … To establish a prima facie case under 42 U.S.C. §1983, Plaintiff must assert that a person acting under color of state law deprived him of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United

White v. Insurance Co. of State of Pennsylvania

282 F. Supp. 2d 618 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 5, 2003

Plaintiffs’ argument that this endorsement turns the indemnity policy into an automobile liability policy is clearly merit-less. … For the last category, when the insured was not a qualified self-insurer, it was required to carry primary insurance of $ 1 million per occurrence. (Doc. No. 32, Exh. 1, declarations). 15 .

Oko v. City of Cleveland

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 7, 2023

would establish that each officer’s actions violate a clearly established constitutional right.”8 (Doc. … However, “[p]olice officers are immune from civil liability unless, in the course of performing their discretionary functions, they violate the plaintiff’s clearly established constitutional rights.” Mullins v.