Case law

Ability Center v. Lumpkin

808 F. Supp. 2d 1003 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 28, 2011

Similarly, here, if the defendant were to bring the ODJFS disability determination process into compliance with federal law, that clearly would benefit Ability Center’s constituents. … Defendant argues that Kohlhorst and Rajner have been determined not disabled, and therefore do not qualify.

Henson, Sr. v. Lucas County Sheriff's Office

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 17, 2025

The defense of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions where their “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … When a defendant raises qualified immunity, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show “that the challenged conduct violated a constitutional or statutory right, and that the right was so clearly established at the time

Jones v. Wittenberg

330 F. Supp. 707 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 9, 1971

The jail food service is clearly shown to be a rather large operation. … This obviously requires that the rules of the jail, and the penalties for violation, must be established in advance, and made clearly known to all inmates.

Keith v. Griffiths

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

The Sixth Circuit has recently reiterated: The defense of qualified immunity protects officials when “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … Applying qualified immunity requires asking: (1) whether an official violated a statutory or constitutional right and (2) whether that right was clearly established. Pearson v.

Miller v. Reed Memorial Library

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 10, 2025

The first tier establishes whether a political subdivision is immune from tort liability under R.C. § 2744.02(A)(1). Id. … The second tier in the immunity analysis, establishes whether exceptions enumerated under R.C. § 2744.02(B) strip the political subdivision of immunity. Id. at § 2744.02(B).

Eagle v. Regan

599 F. Supp. 38 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 23, 1984

.-211 et seq., establish a specific time for filing complaints. … It is established that “the United States, as a soverign, is immune from suit save as it consents to be sued ... and the terms of its consent to be sued in any court define that court’s jurisdiction to entertain the suit.

New Trier Mortgage Corp. v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development

252 F. Supp. 2d 446 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · May 28, 2002

Findings of Fact On May 17, 2000, HUD established the Multifamily Accelerated Processing (“MAP”) program. The MAP Guide, a HUD publication, sets forth the procedures and requirements for participation in MAP. … New Trier argues that “the punishment does not fit the crime” and that the Court should reduce the sanction to “time served.” 88 As an initial matter, the MAP Guide clearly provides the authority to impose the sanction given

Buchanan v. Sowa

592 F. Supp. 1009 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 13, 1984

“If probable cause to arrest has been established, [plaintiffs] cannot recover for a violation of civil rights *1016 arising out of arrest.” Greene v. … In this case, the undisputed facts and circumstances were sufficient to establish probable cause and justify plaintiffs’ arrest.

Feldman v. Gross

106 F. Supp. 308 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 10, 1952

Speaking through Judge Cardozo, the court said: “I think the true view must, therefore, be that the statute removes disabilities, but does not terminate immunities. These are what they always were. … The very words of the opinion clearly show that the decision resulted from temerity and misgiving to declare a statute unconstitutional.

Carolina Casualty Insurance v. Panther II Transportation, Inc.

643 F. Supp. 2d 953 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 6, 2009

All drivers seeking placement must be “qualified” by Panther in order to operate vehicles that have been leased to Panther, a process which begins with a driver becoming “pre-qualified.” Id. at ¶ 15. … In order to become “pre-qualified,” a prospective driver must meet applicable D.O.T. regulations. Id. at ¶ 22.

See v. Cleveland Clinic Foundation

222 F. Supp. 3d 569 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Nov 29, 2016

Denny, 72 Ohio App.3d 417 , 594 N.E.2d 1008, 1012 (1991)) (“Clearly, not every wrongful act is outrageous. … “[T]o establish a prima facie case of discrimination by the defendant, the plaintiff must show (1) that he is a member of a protected group, (2) that he was subject to an adverse employment decision, (3) that he was qualified

Wilson v. Zanghi

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

A claim lacks an arguable basis in law or fact when it is premised on an indisputably meritless legal theory or when the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327. … “The decision whether to prosecute is unquestionably advocacy and qualifies for Imbler protection.” Fields v. Doe, 6th Cir. No. 07-4217, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 28481, at *4 (Dec. 11, 2008) (citing Grant v.

Saxton v. General Motors Corp.

575 F. Supp. 1212 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 20, 1983

received the highest test score of all other applicants for the apprenticeship program, he was not selected for indenture because of a provision in the collective bargaining agreement (Paragraph 131) which allows GM to bypass qualified … Clearly, the statute of limitations would have been tolled while Saxton availed himself of established internal union appeals. *1217 Saxton’s letter-writing cannot be considered a justifiable alternative and this Court cannot

Brown v. Herman's Furniture, Inc.

772 F. Supp. 350 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 16, 1990

Clearly, plaintiff was replaced by an employee not within the protected class for purposes of Title VII analysis. … In response, Northwestern “clearly set forth, through the introduction of admissible evidence, the reasons for the plaintiffs rejection,” Burdine, 450 U.S. at 255 [ 101 S.Ct. at 1094 ]; namely, that Gagne was not qualified

Jenkins v. Dahlby

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 31, 2025

Specifically, he argues that Plaintiff failed to follow the 5 ODRC also argues that it is entitled to summary judgment based on Plaintiff’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies, qualified immunity, and the merits … immunity.

Marano v. Aircraft Braking Systems, Inc.

138 F. Supp. 2d 940 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Apr 9, 2001

In support of his ADEA claim, Maraño states he was fired even though he was more qualified than an employee who was kept. … A reasonable jury could easily find Maraño was qualified to perform the job from which he was fired.

Mason v. Roberts

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 7, 2020

immunity.10 II. … Because the Court finds that Defendants’ arguments regarding Plaintiff’s failure to sufficiently plead protected conduct is dispositive, the Court declines to opine on Defendants’ argument regarding qualified immunity.

Franko v. City of Cleveland

654 F. Supp. 2d 711 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 16, 2009

Count II alleges Franko was knowingly and purposely deprived of established rights, privileges, and immunities secured by the United States Constitution, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , by virtue of the municipality’s … The plaintiff bears the burden of establishing a prima facie case of discrimination by the employer with proof he (1) is a member of a protected group; (2) was subject to an adverse employment decision; (3) was qualified

Rucker v. Clerk of Court

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 13, 2025

A claim lacks an arguable basis in law or fact when it is premised on an indisputably meritless legal theory or when the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327. … Plaintiff’s allegations are so incoherent, implausible, and unsubstantial that they do not provide a basis to establish this Court’s subject matter jurisdiction.

Brownlow v. Edgcomb Metals Co.

573 F. Supp. 679 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Nov 3, 1983

For the reasons outlined below, the Court holds that Ohio qualifies as a deferral state under 29 U.S.C. § 633 (b), and as such deny defendant Edgcomb Metals Company’s (Edgcomb) motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter … Thus, Ohio now clearly qualifies as a “deferral” state under the Sixth Circuit precedent.