Case law

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.

Smith v. City of East Cleveland

363 F. Supp. 1131 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 6, 1973

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS Defendants have moved to dismiss certain named defendants on the grounds of legislative immunity, failure to state a claim against certain defendants and inapplicability of the term “person” … The examination clearly had a disparate effect on blacks taking the examination in» East Cleveland.

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.

Brooks v. Ashtabula County Welfare Department

535 F. Supp. 366 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · May 7, 1981

Instead, Koren relied on his personal evaluation of the individuals, using standards established by him. … to establish a prima facie case of sex discrimination.

Chiquita Brands, Inc. v. Micbruce, Inc.

800 F. Supp. 1521 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 13, 1992

To qualify as a bona fide purchaser, NW will have to show that any trust property it received was transferred “for value” and “without notice of the breach of trust.” 1. … Notice of Breach of Trust NW must also establish that they received the funds “without notice of the breach of trust.”

DaConceicao

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 29, 2025

Finally, in Count IV, Plaintiff asserts that her son is a qualified individual with a disability and was wrongfully denied medication, placement supports, and behavioral health intervention in violation of the ADA and the … 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.

Edison Electric Light Co. v. Packard Electric Co.

61 F. 1002 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 6, 1893

The question of infringement is clearly made out, so far as the New York & Ohio Company, its agents, officers, and stockholders are concerned. … Can a corporation created in one state send its officers, agents, and stockholders into another jurisdiction, to there infringe a patent, and claim immunity from the process of a court of equity restraining such wrong, because

United States v. El-Sadig

133 F. Supp. 2d 600 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 1, 2001

Kissinger was clearly working as the agent of the United States Attorney’s Office. … Hayes, 434 U.S. 357 , 364 n. 8, 98 S.Ct. 663 , 54 L.Ed.2d 604 ) (“[I]t is now clearly established in the Second Circuit that the government may impose conditions which relate to the conduct or treatment of others.”).

Bowman v. City of Fairview Park

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

North Olmsted is a political subdivision that qualifies for immunity under Ohio Rev. Code § 2744.02(A)(1). … Officers Beck and Kelley, in their individual capacities as employees of North Olmsted, qualify for immunity under Ohio Rev.

Massi v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield Mutual of Ohio

765 F. Supp. 904 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · May 22, 1991

“There is a clearly enunciated rule in this circuit that age discrimination cases are to be decided on a ‘case by case basis.’ … Clearly, however, many of the skills employed to administer the old program would also be useful in implementing the new one.

Parra v. Cuyahoga County

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

Qualified Immunity Mr. Mills also argues he is entitled to qualified immunity against Plaintiff’s federal claims. (ECF No. 14-1, PageID #244–45.) … Mills in his individual capacity, the Court need not address qualified immunity. II.

Shoemake v. Mansfield City School District Board of Education

61 F. Supp. 3d 704 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Nov 20, 2014

To establish a prima facie case of employment discrimination under this statute, Plaintiff must show that he: (1) is a member of a protected class; (2) was qualified for his position; (3) suffered an adverse employment action … Here, Plaintiff alleges he is African-American and was qualified for his position. (Doc. No. 1 at ¶¶ 9, 18-21.)

Cook v. Springfield Township

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 28, 2023

For his part, Mayor Justice also asserts qualified immunity. Plaintiffs must show that (a) the defendant violated a constitutional right and (b) that right was clearly established. E.g., Quigley v. … When assessing qualified immunity at the pleading stage, a court must examine the complaint for ‘facts plausibly making out a claim that the defendant's conduct violated a constitutional right that was clearly established

Koch v. State of Ohio

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 9, 2020

If this is indeed the basis for his claim, Koch’s claims against Meyer would be dismissed on qualified immunity grounds7, and his claims against the ODNR 6 In paragraph 67, Koch alleges he has “publicly criticized the … No. 1 at 10) (emphasis added). 7 Koch has no clearly established right to have the Inspector General investigate his complaint. See Sizemore v.

Bowman v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.

724 F. Supp. 493 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 12, 1989

In addition, the salaried personnel manual at this time clearly reserved the right for *498 Firestone to interpret the provisions established thereunder: Firestone shall promulgate any rules and regulations which it deems … In the case at bar plaintiffs were in the protected class; and they were qualified for the positions they held.

Bruno v. United Steelworkers of America

784 F. Supp. 1286 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 29, 1992

A comparison of Kidder with the case at bar establishes several important differences. … The term “qualified beneficiary" in § 1166(4)(A)' includes “covered employees” when the qualifying event is a termination under § 1163(2). 29 U.S.C. § 1167 (3)(B). 15 .

Vance v. City of Maumee

960 F. Supp. 2d 720 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · May 15, 2013

I reject the City’s argument that Plaintiff is not “qualified” to have the alley opened. B. … The statute clearly stated that the hospital’s purpose was to serve patients in its care. Id. at 940 .

International Ass'n of Machinists & Aerospace Workers, Lodge No. 1194 v. Garwood Industries, Inc.

368 F. Supp. 357 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 13, 1973

The plan contains an order of precedence in the payment of benefits, initially established in the third supplemental agreement. … That interpretation is a reasonable one in view of the fact that the plan contains a provision clearly designed to cover the complementary possibility. That section reads as follows: Art.

United States v. Cook

678 F. Supp. 1292 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 14, 1987

It accordingly held that act to be privileged and incapable of being compelled without a statutory grant of use immunity. Id. at 617 , 104 S.Ct. at 1244 . … “By signing the directive, Secord would be testifying just as clearly as if he were forced to verbally assert his [consent].”

Masevice v. Life Insurance Company of North America

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 16, 2023

Plaintiff’s concerns about attending the IME in person were valid, given her symptoms and her compromised immune system. … As a general rule, to establish by a preponderance of the evidence means to prove that something is more likely so than not so.