Case law

Smith v. Ware

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Dec 29, 2020

An action has no arguable basis in law when a Defendant is immune from suit or when a Plaintiff claims a violation of a legal interest which clearly does not exist. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327. … To state a prima facie case for retaliation prohibited by the First Amendment, Plaintiff must establish: 1) he engaged in protected conduct; 2) an adverse action was taken against him that would deter a person of ordinary

Reams v. Local 18, International Union of Operating Engineers

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 23, 2023

Plaintiff’s ability to work operates in favor of her establishing a prima facie case; even in her condition, “she [was] otherwise qualified for the position, with or without reasonable accommodation”. … Ohio) (“Plaintiff is clearly disabled” where she had a blood-clotting disorder); Maat v. Cnty. of Ottawa, 657 F.

J.L. Spoons, Inc. v. City of Brunswick

181 F.R.D. 354 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 15, 1998

The 44 Liquormart Court disavowed LaRue’s reasoning and held that “the Twenty-first Amendment does not qualify the constitutional prohibition against laws abridging the freedom of speech embodied in the First Amendment.” … Given that the vague terms of Rule 52 not only apply to conduct, but also apply to the spoken and written word, Rule 52 clearly “sweeps within its prohibitions what may not be punished under the First and Fourteenth Amendments

John Carroll University v. United States

643 F. Supp. 675 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 10, 1986

. § 403 (b), the University established a retirement annuity plan for its employees. … The Sixth Circuit has reiterated repeatedly that “no issue is immune from summary judgment.” Heheman v. E.W.

Buchanan v. Rhodes

249 F. Supp. 860 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 2, 1966

commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department; or a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it; or the impossibility of deciding without an initial policy determination of a kind clearly … We can take judicial notice of a dearth of qualified trial lawyers. We are well aware of the reluctance of the members of the bar to work through the summer months.

Eisen v. Thompson

370 B.R. 762 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 29, 2007

The lower court’s ruling should be reversed if it “relied upon clearly erroneous findings of fact, improperly applied the governing law, or used an erroneous legal standard.” Elec. … In addition, however, the Chapter 13 form includes a separate line for “Qualified retirement deductions” (Line 55).

Plazzo v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance

697 F. Supp. 1437 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 21, 1988

Clearly, it is the purpose of the act to provide broad coverage for those entitled to that protection. … The Extended Earnings Plan establishes a benefit whereby an agent with at least five years service who is terminated upon retirement, death or disability, or qualified cancellation for other reason, is entitled to a sum equal

Stanich v. Travelers Indemnity Co.

249 F.R.D. 506 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 28, 2008

Clearly, this is the strongest of Travelers’ arguments. … Travelers has not established that Mr.

Bouchard v. American Home Products Corp.

213 F. Supp. 2d 802 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 30, 2002

In other words, a party cannot qualify as an expert generally by showing that the expert has specialized knowledge or training which would qualify him or her to opine on some other issue. Redman v. John D. … The court has the power to exclude evidence in limine only when evidence is clearly inadmissible on all potential grounds. Cf. Luce v.

Toler

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 12, 2026

A claim lacks an arguable basis in law or fact where it is premised on an indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Id. … 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.

Vass v. Riester & Thesmacher Co.

79 F. Supp. 2d 853 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 6, 2000

However, it only prohibits discrimination against qualified individuals with a disability. See 42 U.S.C. § 12112 (b)(3)(A), (a). As discussed above, however, Mr. … He states clearly that he was injured badly in January of 1996, and he suggests that he was not scheduled to return to work until October or December of that year.

Swint v. Ohio Bureau of Workmen's Compensation

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 24, 2020

A claim lacks an arguable basis in law or fact when it is premised upon an indisputably meritless legal theory or when the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327. … Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, and the party invoking jurisdiction bears the burden of establishing the Court’s authority to hear a case. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins.

Abdulnour v. Campbell Soup Supply Co., LLC

464 F. Supp. 2d 711 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 31, 2006

A prima facie case of discrimination exists if the plaintiff can show that he: (1) is a member of a protected class; (2) was terminated; (3) was qualified for the position; and (4) was replaced by a person outside the class … Implied contract In Ohio, there is “a strong presumption in favor of a contract terminable at will unless the terms of the contract or other circumstances clearly manifest the parties’ intent to bind each other.”

Lifter v. Cleveland State University

202 F. Supp. 3d 779 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 17, 2016

“The analysis of a defendant’s motives in retaliation claims is well established: the plaintiff has the burden of establishing that his protected conduct was a motivating factor behind any harm, and then the burden of production … City of Cleveland, supra. .Boise raises the defense of qualified immunity. Thus, the Court’s initial inquiry is "whether the facts alleged demonstrate a violation of [plaintiffs’] First Amendment rights...”

United States v. Payner

434 F. Supp. 113 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Apr 28, 1977

Due process of law is a summarized constitutional guarantee of respect for those personal immunities which, as Mr. … The Court is well aware of the long established doctrine that constitutional questions will be avoided when an alternate means can be employed to the same effect. Burton v.

Reynolds v. Oliver, Jr.

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 23, 2024

Consequently, “[i]t is to be presumed that a cause lies outside this limited jurisdiction, and the burden of establishing the contrary rests upon the party asserting jurisdiction.” Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. … Finally, there is clearly no meeting of minds with respect to the terms. Under contract law, failing to respond to a demand is not the equivalent to acceptance of the terms. Plaintiffs’ claim is entirely frivolous.

Kemp v. Biden

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 7, 2024

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. … Finally, even if Plaintiff could establish standing to bring this action, the President of the United States has absolute immunity from civil damage actions arising out of the execution of official duties of office.

United States v. Shafer

384 F. Supp. 496 · District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 29, 1974

The next 36 hours, until the morning of May 4th, followed the established pattern of activity ; the campus was quiet by day and restless at night. … It noted the origins of the section as “an anti-discrimination measure” (at 98), later extended to prohibit the “deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities,” guaranteed by federal law.

Hill v. City of Toledo

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Nov 13, 2020

ANALYSIS As an initial matter, Plaintiff is clearly attacking his conviction and his sentence. … Plaintiff fails to establish a basis for liability for his claims against the City of Toledo and Lucas County.

Kiser v. State of Ohio

District Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 25, 2021

shows that he was engaged in protected activity or that he was prevented from filing grievances, and Defendants would have taken the same actions in the absence of protected activity; and (3) Defendants are entitled to qualified … immunity.