Case law

Navarro v. Leu

469 F. Supp. 832 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 30, 1979

Omar Brown. … Wambles v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, supra; Newman v. Local 1101, supra.

Grantonz v. Earley

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 10, 2021

See Rock & Roll Hall of Fame and Museum, Inc. v. Gentile Prods., 134 F.3d 749, 753 (6th Cir. 1998); Vittitow v. … Dahl v. Board of Trustees of Western Michigan University, No. 1:21-cv-757, 2021 WL 3891620, *2 (W.D. Mich. Aug. 31, 2021), quoting Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520, 532 (1993).

United States Ex Rel. Pappis v. Tomlinson

45 F. Supp. 447 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · May 23, 1942

This Court cannot, in view of the latest Circuit Court decision in the case of Zapp v. … The matter of abuse of discretion by an administrative official or administrative board must be viewed in the light of existing conditions.

DeMarco v. Cuyahoga County Department of Human Services

12 F. Supp. 2d 715 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 24, 1998

Plaintiff DeMarco appealed his demotion to the State Personnel Board of Review. … West v. Grand County, 967 F.2d 362, 367 (10th Cir.1992). Plaintiff admits that he was afforded appeal rights to the State Personnel Board of Review under state law, and that he challenged the notice in that proceeding.

Abernathy v. Kral

305 F. Supp. 3d 795 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Apr 17, 2018

Id. ; see also Brown v. U.S. , 692 F.3d 550 , 553 (6th Cir. 2012) (applying same doctrine following criminal forfeiture). … E.g. , U.S. v. Hornick , 815 F.2d 1156 , 1158 (7th Cir. 1987) ; U.S. v. Medlin , 842 F.2d 1194 , 1196-1197 (10th Cir. 1988) ; U.S. v. Wright , 667 F.2d 793 (9th Cir. 1982) ; U.S. v.

Finley v. United States

314 F. Supp. 905 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 2, 1970

Morgan v. Schlanger, supra; Starr v. Fregosi, supra; Brandon v. Art Centre Hospital, supra; Watson v. United States, supra; Riley v. Layton, supra; Brown v. … Goode as an accurate statement of Ohio law was recognized by Judge Bailey Brown, sitting by designation in the Southern District of Ohio, in Rogers v. United States, 216 F.Supp. 1 (D.C.S.D.

Kovacic v. Cuyahoga County Department of Children & Family Services

809 F. Supp. 2d 754 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 25, 2011

Ry. v. Browning, 310 U.S. 362, 369 , 60 S.Ct. 968 , 84 L.Ed. 1254 (1940). In short, a “custom” is a “legal institution that is permanent and established” but not memorialized by written law. Feliciano v. … See e.g., Achterhof, 886 F.2d at 830-31 ; Brown v.

Spain v. City of Mansfield

915 F. Supp. 919 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 9, 1996

Id. at 542-543 , 105 S.Ct. at 1493-1494 , quoting Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 569-570 , 92 S.Ct. 2701, 2705-2706 , 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972). … Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 , 88 S.Ct. 1731 , 20 L.Ed.2d 811 (1968).

Maxwell v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

331 F. Supp. 2d 599 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 20, 2004

United States v. Maxwell, 46 F.3d 1128 (4th Cir.1995). According to Mr. … Maxwell’s deportation proceedings, Stone v.

United States v. Buckeye Steamship Co.

183 F. Supp. 644 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Apr 20, 1960

Detroit Bank v. United States, 317 U.S. 329, 338 , 63 S.Ct. 297, 301 , 87 L.Ed. 304 ; Currin v. Wallace, 306 U.S. 1, 13 , 59 S.Ct. 379 , 83 L.Ed. 441 . In National Labor Relations Board v. … See Williamson v. Lee Optical Co.; Stewart Machine Co. v. Davis; National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin; A. F. of L. v. American Sash Co., and Clark v. Paul Gray, Inc., supra.

Ehrlich v. Kovack

135 F. Supp. 3d 638 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 1, 2015

See Pearson, 555 U.S. at 232 , 129 S.Ct. 808 ; Everson v. Leis, 556 F.3d 484, 493 (6th Cir.2009); Pritchard v. Hamilton Township Board of Trustees, 424 Fed.Appx. 492, 498 (6th Cir.2011). … Bd. of Comm’rs v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397, 404 , 117 S.Ct. 1382 , 137 L.Ed.2d 626 (1997).

Abrams v. Johnson

383 F. Supp. 450 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 21, 1974

However, in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. … As Judge Gesell concludes in Hackley v.

Schofield v. United States

214 F. Supp. 97 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 3, 1962

The Board of Tax Appeals allowed the accrual. … Dean v. Commissioner, 9 T.C. 256 (1947). It evidently reverted to its original position in the 1957 case of Bender v.

United States v. Yee

134 F.R.D. 161 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 10, 1991

See Green, Brown [United States v.] Brady [ 595 F.2d 359 (6th Cir.1979)], Franks . Kozminski, 821 F.2d at 1202 (Krupansky, J. concurring) (emphasis added). … Accord, United States v. Brown, 557 F.2d 541, 556 (6th Cir.1977) (“the lack of certainty went to the weight to be assigned to the testimony of the expert, not its admissibility”); United States v.

McCafferty v. Centerior Service Co.

983 F. Supp. 715 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 9, 1997

The Lavelle decision represents the relevant law of Ohio on this subject and thus governs the instant case, making Plaintiffs’ exposure to radiation the requisite physical impact. 4 In Brown v. … While the Brown Court did cite a ease applying Ohio tort law, see id. (citing Kesecker v.

Brock v. Local 150, United Paperworkers International Union, AFL-CIO

670 F. Supp. 213 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Nov 13, 1986

The Executive Board denied the protest by letter dated January 10, 1985. Mr. … As stated in Donovan v.

Thrower v. Jividen

232 F. Supp. 2d 793 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 20, 2002

In Huffman v. … Similarly, in Trainor v.

Haas v. Quest Recovery Services, Inc.

338 F. Supp. 2d 797 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 20, 2004

Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett, 531 U.S. 356 , 121 S.Ct. 955 , 148 L.Ed.2d 866 (2001), provides the starting point for the Eleventh Amendment analysis. … July 6, 2004) (noting that inmate’s Title II claim was “problematic,” but granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment on other grounds); McNulty v. Board of Educ., Civ. No.2003-2520, 2004 WL 1554401 , *3, 2004 U.S.

Fast v. Wead

509 F. Supp. 744 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 21, 1981

See, e. g., Harkins v. Eldredge, 505 F.2d 802 (8th Cir. 1974). … The alleged improprieties of the prosecuting attorney, defendant Brown, were done within his official capacity and are immune from suit under this section, Imbler v.

Bennett v. Dyer's Chop House, Inc.

350 F. Supp. 153 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 26, 1972

Therefore the competition faced by permit holders is severely restricted by the operation of the Liquor Control Board. In Seidenberg v. … Dandridge v. Williams, 397 U.S. 471 , 90 S.Ct. 1153 , 25 L.Ed.2d 491 (1970); McDonald v. Board of Election Commissioners, 394 U.S. 802 , 89 S.Ct. 1404 , 22 L.Ed.2d 739 (1969); McGowan v.