Case law

Scaccia v. Lemmie

236 F. Supp. 2d 830 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · May 6, 2002

Plaintiff attempted to locate another position with the City of Dayton which was vacant and for which he was qualified, so that he could transfer to another position. … Despite the ambiguity of the term “defendant or defendants,” it is well established that removal generally requires unanimity among the defendants. 9 Balazik v.

Lawroski v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance

981 F. Supp. 2d 704 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Nov 1, 2013

that he was qualified for the position, and (4) that he was replaced by a person outside of the protected class .... the fourth element may also be satisfied by showing that similarly situated non-protected employees were … But, those paragraphs clearly describe an alleged “pattern and practice” of intentional discrimination, by referencing “ageist remarks, systematically terminating older employees and replacing Plaintiff with Mr.

Wiltz v. Yost

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jun 16, 2025

III, § 1 (establishing the Office of the Ohio Attorney General). As do state universities and their employees and officers. McCormick v. Miami Univ., 693 F.3d 654, 661–62 (6th Cir. 2012); see also Ohio Rev. … Ultimately, though, choosing to seek a vexatious litigator determination qualifies for prosecutorial immunity. See Cooper, 203 F.3d at 948.

Hutchison v. President Joe Biden

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Dec 6, 2024

An action has 2 no arguable legal basis when the defendant is immune from suit or when plaintiff claims a violation of a legal interest which clearly … Ray, 386 U.S. 547, 553-55 (1967) (judicial immunity); Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409, 430-31 (1976) (prosecutorial immunity)); Dep’t of the Army v.

Hill v. Pell

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jan 22, 2024

Id., Section VI.G.1. 2 This code provision previously defined Legal Mail as: mail addressed to an inmate clearly bearing the return address of an attorney-at-law, a public service law office … Ohio July 25, 2023) (denying motion to dismiss a claim about legal mail and denying qualified immunity); - Leach v. DeWine, No. 3:22-cv-528, 2023 WL 4352553 (N.D.

Flanagan Lieberman Hoffman & Swaim v. Transamerica Life & Annuity Co.

228 F. Supp. 2d 830 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 26, 2002

Under the Plan, the Plaintiff established four annuity investment accounts to fund its pension benefits. (PX38; PX39; PX40; PX97.) 4. … Moreover, it is an established and well-regarded law firm.

Hall v. Scioto County Jail

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 6, 2023

Plaintiff has established that he does not have sufficient funds to pay the entire filing fee at this time. … An action has no arguable legal basis when the defendant is immune from suit or when plaintiff claims a violation of a legal interest which clearly does not exist. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327.

Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Home Insurance

90 F. Supp. 2d 893 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 30, 2000

It is clearly unhappy with the outcome reached by the unanimous Panel. … Only if one of the five grounds is established under 9 U.S.C. § 10 may the award be vacated. The Court concludes *906 that the defendant has failed to establish any of the grounds for vacation.

Hall v. Hebrank

102 F. Supp. 2d 844 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jan 19, 1999

To establish a prima facie case under McDonnell Douglas, Hall must show (1) that she was a member of a protected class, (2) that she suffered an adverse employment action, (3) that she was qualified for the position, and … Wourms’ statement also does not qualify as non-hearsay under Fed.R.Evid. 801(d)(2)(D), as an admission of a party opponent.

Davis

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Dec 10, 2025

“[T]he trial court clearly had jurisdiction in the instant matter, as Kim's post[-]decree show-cause motion invoked both the inherent power of a domestic relations court to enforce its prior orders and the court's continuing … Lucky Land Management, LLC, 134 F.4th 868 (6th Cir., 2025), the Sixth Circuit recently restated the factors that a plaintiff must establish in order to be entitled to such extraordinary relief.

El Bey v. Branstool

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Apr 24, 2023

The screening procedures established by § 1915 apply to complaints filed by prisoners against governmental entities, officials or employees regardless of whether the plaintiff has paid the filing fee, as in this case, or … An action has no arguable legal basis when the defendant is immune from suit or when plaintiff claims a violation of a legal interest which clearly does not exist. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327.

Bishop

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Feb 4, 2026

As clearly stated in your record, there are no indications you need a cane and you should no longer have one because the order expired on 3/25/25. … Cunningham informed Plaintiff that he qualified for a hip replacement and that NCI medical staff would arrange an appointment for Plaintiff with an orthopedic doctor. (Compl. ¶ 20, ECF No. 1-1.)

Ashraf v. Ohio Dept. of Rehabilitation & Correction

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 22, 2019

Insp. has clearly admitted that defendants don’t follow NAAQS and have failed to designate housing areas in accordance with such. Therefore, I’m entitled to damages pursuant to Just v. … Because Ohio has not waived its sovereign immunity in federal court, it is entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity from suit for monetary damages. Mixon v. State of Ohio, 193 F.3d 389, 397 (6th Cir. 1999).

Golden Home Health Care, LLC v. Verma

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 26, 2020

Sanyasi their right to choose a willing and qualified health care provider. (See id.) … Still, an “injunction is an extraordinary remedy which should be granted only if the movant carries his or her burden of proving that the circumstances clearly demand it.” Overstreet v. Lexington-Fayette Urban Cnty.

Alford v. Schweitzer

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Apr 25, 2025

An action has no arguable legal basis when the defendant is immune from suit or when the plaintiff claims a violation of a legal interest that clearly does not exist. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327. … Informal complaints can qualify as protected First Amendment conduct, but only if they are not frivolous. Maben v. Thelen, 887 F.3d 252, 264 (6th Cir. 2018).

Elkins v. American Showa, Inc.

219 F.R.D. 414 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jun 4, 2002

A class of all women who worked at the Blanchester plant during the proposed class period clearly satisfies the numerosity requirement, as that number is indisputably in the hundreds. … Current class counsel are clearly qualified to litigate a class action of this nature and have demonstrated their willingness to diligently pursue the claims of the putative class members.

Tolliver v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 27, 2024

The Sixth Circuit has explained why res judicata does not apply in these circumstances: Ordinarily, the ‘transaction’ that gives rise to a cause of action will be clearly delineated. … A law “that works an ongoing violation of constitutional rights does not become immunized from legal challenge for all time merely because no one challenges it within two [or four] years of its enactment.”

Steele v. Neff

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jan 2, 2020

. § 1983, and qualified immunity applies and bars all of Plaintiff’s claims. (ECF No. 22.) II. … Section 1983 merely provides a vehicle for enforcing individual rights established elsewhere and does not itself establish any substantive rights. See Gonzaga Univ. v. Doe, 536 U.S. 273, 285 (2002).

Mick v. Level Propane Gases, Inc.

203 F.R.D. 324 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Oct 26, 2001

This principle clearly applies in the case at bar. … According to Level, individual issues predominate because proof of individual reliance is required in order to establish claims for fraud and deceit.

Brown v. Chambers-Smith

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 13, 2022

In order to be granted relief, a plaintiff must establish that the defendant deprived him of a right secured by the U.S. … One constitutional interest clearly involved is the right to privileged communication between an attorney and his client, protected by the Sixth Amendment.