Case law

Brock

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Oct 22, 2025

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. … Defendants also asserted they are entitled to qualified immunity. The Court granted Defendants motion and dismissed the action on December 8, 2023. Id.

Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Ass'n v. Arctic Express, Inc.

87 F. Supp. 2d 820 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 3, 2000

The Commission found, in Dart , that the non-regulated company’s maintenance fund qualified as an escrow fund under the Regulations. … Just as in Dart , the maintenance fund in this case qualifies as an escrow fund and is subject to the regulations of 49 C.F.R. § 376.12 .

Taper v. Tabor

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 7, 2025

Lastly, they raise qualified immunity as a defense. (Id. at 21–22). Ultimately, the Undersigned agrees that Plaintiff did not exhaust his available administrative remedies. … Because dismissal is appropriate on this basis, the Undersigned does not address Defendants’ merits or qualified immunity arguments. Date: August 7, 2025 /s/ Kimberly A.

University of Cincinnati v. Shalala

867 F. Supp. 1325 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Nov 8, 1994

The facility is able to demonstrate clearly that these services, procedures or supplies and its per treatment costs are prudent and reasonable when compared to those of facilities with a similar patient mix.... … Clearly stated at 42 C.F.R. § 413.170 (f)(5), the burden of proof was on the plaintiff, and the plaintiff only, to show that the excess overhead costs were directly attributable to the atypical patient mix.

Murray v. Ohio Department of Corrections

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 31, 2021

As this never happened, it was neither “clearly erroneous nor contrary to law” for the Magistrate Judge to strike those portions of the declarations submitted by Dr. Heyd and Dr. … Heyd argues in his final objection that the Magistrate Judge erred when concluding that he is not entitled to qualified immunity. (Doc. 128 at 13–14). But, Dr.

In Re Cardinal Health Inc. Securities Litigations

426 F. Supp. 2d 688 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Apr 12, 2006

Though Plaintiffs have established Cardinal was clearly a profitable client for E & Y, such claims have failed in the past. See Fidel, 392 F.3d at 232. … Though, in their pleadings, Plaintiffs and Defendants dispute whether the Court may consider the magnitude of alleged accounting errors in its analysis, Fidel clearly establishes the Sixth Circuit's decision declining "to

Victoria's Secret Stores v. Artco Equipment Co.

194 F. Supp. 2d 704 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 27, 2002

These attorneys either did not answer my initial inquiries or ultimately did not take the case due to the fact that either: 1) they were not qualified to handle trademark infringement litigation or 2) they were not qualified … Similarly, these attorneys either did not answer my inquiries or ultimately did not take the case due to the fact that either: 1) they were not qualified to handle this trademark litigation or 2) they were not qualified to

Brown v. State of Ohio

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 17, 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 which clearly does not exist. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327. … But generally, they are immune from suit because of prosecutorial and judicial immunity.

Bishop

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 6, 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. Plaintiff is currently being seen by Dr. Sullivan, an orthopedic doctor, for his hip replacement. (Am. Compl. ¶ 19, ECF No. 4.)

Anderson v. Spoljarik

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 6, 2020

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because “no constitutional violation occurred.” … immunity based upon the lack of any evidence from which a jury could find that he violated any clearly established constitutional right. 31 V.

Anderson v. Spoljarik

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Feb 12, 2020

For the same reasons, summary judgment cannot be granted on qualified immunity on those claims.25 G. … immunity based upon the lack of any evidence from which a jury could find that he violated any clearly established constitutional right. 31 Defendants

Allied Artists Pictures Corp. v. Rhodes

496 F. Supp. 408 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 10, 1980

Clearly, each of the plaintiffs fits this description. However, this does not establish that the Act discriminates against interstate commerce. … , or established clientele, if a new bidder promises a large guarantee.

Franklin v. Adath Isreal Temple

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 4, 2025

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. … (Doc. 1, PageID 2-3).1 Given that report and evidence that she paid a $605 filing fee in another case on January 31, 2025, 2 it is unclear whether Plaintiff actually qualifies to proceed in forma pauperis.

Michael Mitchell, Jr. & Kyle Finnell v. Annette Chambers-Smith, et al.

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 10, 2026

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. … To establish liability under § 1983 against an individual defendant, a plaintiff must plead and prove that the defendant was personally involved in the conduct that forms the basis of his complaint. Greene v.

King v. Lindsey

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 28, 2025

Here, “because Ohio has not consented to suits in federal court nor has Congress abrogated Ohio’s immunity under § 1983,” the State of Ohio has immunity for claims against it. Smith v. DeWine, 476 F. … Ohio June 22, 2011) (“Petitioner suffered the potential loss of visitation and commissary privileges, neither of which qualify as a protected liberty interest.”).

Franklin v. McDonald's

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 4, 2025

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. … Given that report and evidence that she paid a $605 filing fee in another case on January 31, 2025, 1 it is unclear whether Plaintiff actually qualifies to proceed in forma pauperis.

Rheinfrank v. Abbott Laboratories, Inc.

119 F. Supp. 3d 749 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 10, 2015

Privitera is well-qualified based on this experience and education. Defendants contend that Dr. … Privitera is qualified as a neurologist, and his credentials establish his -expertise in the field. However, Dr.

Smith v. Yost

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Dec 21, 2023

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. … “Like other forms of official immunity, judicial immunity is an immunity from suit, not just from ultimate assessment of damages.” Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11 (1991); Pierson v.

Bellios v. Victor Balata Belting Co.

724 F. Supp. 514 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Oct 20, 1989

Accordingly, summary judgment is clearly proper "against a party who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to the party's case and on which that party will bear the burden of … First, plaintiff has not been able to establish a prima facie case of age discrimination.

CNEST Oregon Solutions, LLC v. United States

96 F. Supp. 3d 726 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 16, 2015

Plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that subject matter jurisdiction exists. Cartwright v. Garner, 751 F.3d 752, 759-760 (6th Cir.2014). … The undisputed facts before the Court establish that he had actual knowledge of the seizure of the vehicle.