Case law

Remillard v. Warden Noble Correctional Institution

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 20, 2021

“ThIed state court’s application of clearly established law must be objectively unreasonable.” . … C oift yth oef CPhriivcailgeoges or Immunities Clause.

State of Ohio, ex rel. Dave Yost Attorney General of Ohio v. Ascent Health Services LLC

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jan 2, 2024

Here, however, Defendants are clearly nof seeking removal based on federal-question jurisdiction and, therefore, the Court does not address whether preemption would provide a separate basis for removal. … The statute protects federal interests by allowing federal officials—and those acting under a federal officer—to present their federal immunity defenses in federal court, rather than state courts, which may be hostile to

Adams v. Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc.

917 F. Supp. 2d 697 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jan 9, 2013

Review of Plan Terms Under ERISA, every employee benefit plan must be established and maintained pursuant to a written instrument specifying the basis on which payments are to be made from the plan. 29 U.S.C. §§ 1102 (a)( … This court concluded that plaintiff did not qualify for severance benefits under the plan. Id. at 1430 .

Maseru v. University Of Cincinnati

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jun 16, 2021

Plaintiff’s Prima Facie Case To establish a prima facie case for failure to hire, Dr. … Maseru may have been qualified, Dr. Turner’s qualifications were significantly better. UC argues that Dr. Turner’s experience managing a graduate program was “highly valued” and clearly distinguished him from Dr.

Washington v. Pavite

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 7, 2023

claims and to recommend dismissal of Plaintiff’s Complaint, or any portion of it, which is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Facial plausibility is established “when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id.

White v. Erdos

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Apr 30, 2020

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. … Accordingly, plaintiff has not established a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of his constitutional claims or that he will suffer irreparable harm absent a preliminary injunction.

Yisrael v. SST Conveyor Components Inc

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Apr 28, 2022

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. … The wording of the referenced form is based upon established federal law.

Allen v. Ohio Civil Service Employees Association AFSCME, Local 11

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 20, 2020

being barred by sovereign immunity. … Alam, 915 F.3d 1028, 1039 (6th Cir. 2019) (noting that qualified immunity does not cover public officials who knowingly violate the law). 2.

Smith v. Lavender

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 9, 2022

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. … App'x 972, 974 (6th Cir.2011) (“Personal involvement is necessary to establish section 1983 liability.”).

Jones v. DeWine

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 19, 2021

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). … Importantly, the resultant harm, while serious and concerning, does not establish a liable state of mind. See Swain v.

Runser v. City of Dayton, Ohio

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Feb 24, 2022

In Ex Parte Young, the Supreme Court announced an exception to Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity. See Ex Parte Young, 209 U.S. 123. … B. 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Claim Section 1983 establishes “‘a cause of action for deprivation under color of state law, of any rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution

Straughter v. Eddy

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Dec 7, 2023

The State’s motion clearly stated that it was filed under that limited statutory authority, and that the State was not waiving personal service or “any defenses available at law” that might later be raised by individual … It is well established that states are entitled to sovereign immunity from suit, absent an express waiver of that immunity.

Collins v. Ohio House of Representatives

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 17, 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. … Sorema N.A., 534 U.S. 506 (2002) established that a complaint alleging employment discrimination need not establish all elements of proof under McDonnell Douglas, such a complaint still must satisfy the “plausibility”

Parker-Reed v. Primal Vantage Company, Inc.

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 30, 2021

“To qualify as an expert under Rule 702, a witness must first establish his expertise by reference to ‘knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education.” Pride v. … Munsell is qualified. He is a mechanical engineer who specializes in analyzing the failures of mechanical systems.

Jobete Music Co. v. Johnson Communications, Inc.

285 F. Supp. 2d 1077 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 12, 2003

Accordingly, Plaintiffs have established that WDAO publicly performed their copyrighted works. … Construing the evidence in the light most favorable to Defendants, there is no genuine issue of material fact as to whether Defendants qualify as innocent infringers.

Howell v. NaphCare, Inc.

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 11, 2022

At the very least, they are entitled to qualified immunity, because it was not clearly established that following the recommendation of medical personnel could have amounted to deliberate indifference under such … The fact that the NaphCare Defendants may have ultimately been incorrect about Howell’s condition is insufficient to establish recklessness.

Smith v. Advancepierre Foods, Inc.

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

App’x 609, 613 (6th Cir. 2018) (finding the plaintiff was “clearly qualified” for the position given her 23 years at the company and 7 years in the manager position). … That also would support a jury finding that Smith was qualified.

Smith v. DeWine

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 3, 2020

The State of Ohio has immunity for all claims against it because Ohio has not consented to suits in federal court nor has Congress abrogated Ohio’s immunity under § 1983. See Ohio v. … Importantly, the resultant harm, while serious and concerning, does not establish a liable state of mind. See Swain v.

Richmond v. NCR Corp.

227 F. Supp. 2d 802 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 13, 2002

Finally, the summary of Plan C was clearly that: a “summary” of a plan. … The second stated, in pertinent part, that retirees "will be eligible for retiree insurance benefits if you normally qualify or if you would qualify by adding five years to your age and five years to your service....”

Tri County Wholesale Distributors, Inc. v. Labatt USA Operating Co.

978 F. Supp. 2d 860 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Oct 16, 2013

As an extraordinary remedy, a prehminary injunction is to be granted only if the movant carries his or her burden of proving that the circumstances clearly demand it. Leary v. … If notice is not received within this ninety-day period, a franchise relationship is established between the parties.