Case law

Dorsey v. Banks

749 F. Supp. 2d 715 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 28, 2010

established law. … established law contemplated by § 2254(d)(1) is, in fact, clearly established.

Leisring v. Hamilton County Clerk of Courts

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Apr 1, 2020

Defendant’s claim that Smith was more qualified therefore is not worthy of belief. … Plaintiff clearly disagrees with the disregard of the recommendation, but her wish that the panel had focused on different criteria does not establish pretext, so long as the selected criteria were not discriminatory.

Mitchell v. Abercrombie & Fitch, Co.

428 F. Supp. 2d 725 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 31, 2006

The Executive Exemption Abercrombie bears the burden of establishing that Oros qualifies for the executive exemption. Martin v. Indiana Mich. Power Co., 381 F.3d 574, 578 (6th Cir.2004). … Oros qualified for the executive exemption under 29 U.S.C. § 213 (a)(1) and 29 C.F.R. § 541.1 .

Lytle

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

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. … As noted above, a single instance of alleged unconstitutional conduct is insufficient to establish liability under § 1983 against a municipality.

Wintermute v. the Guardian

524 F. Supp. 2d 954 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Nov 27, 2007

The language Guardian refers to the Court, Doc. 16, citing AR 1017 and 914, does not establish such a procedure. … Randolph and Stevens (an infectious disease specialist and endocrinologist, respectively) were not qualified to render an opinion regarding Wintermute’s condition. Doc. 15 at p. 10. However, review by Drs.

Harding v. US Attorney's Office

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jun 22, 2021

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.

United States v. American Electric Power Service Corp.

218 F. Supp. 2d 931 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 16, 2002

Plaintiffs move to strike this defense on the basis that Defendants cannot establish the requisite elements of selective prosecution. … Usery, the Court rejected the rule that state immunity from federal regulation turns on a judicial consideration of the “traditional,” “integral” or “necessary” nature of a particular government function.

Akhter v. Blinken

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 19, 2024

Before a consular officer may issue such a visa, the U.S. citizen must file a “Petition for Alien Relative (Form I-130)” with the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to establish a qualifying relationship … “To hold otherwise would be to sanction the perpetual delay of governmental obligations that are clearly mandated by law.” Liu v. Michael Chertoff, No. 07-00734, 2007 WL 2119427, at *1 (N.D. Cal.

Hosbrook v. Ethicon, Inc.

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Apr 23, 2021

The state appellate court, however, specifically found that plaintiffs’ expert was not qualified “to give expert opinions which clearly require medical expertise that he does not possess.” … Rosenzweig is qualified to testify generally on the adequacy of the TVT– O’s product warnings and marketing materials.”). Any opinion that Dr.

Kissinger v. Board of Trustees of Ohio State Univ.

786 F. Supp. 1308 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Feb 27, 1992

“A plaintiff may also qualify as the prevailing party if his lawsuit is found to be the ‘catalyst’ which causes the defendant to make significant changes in its past practices.” Othen *1311 v. … Has the Plaintiff established a basis in law for the relief obtained?

Washington v. Department of Treasury

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jan 6, 2022

A complaint presents no arguable legal basis by advancing “indisputably meritless” legal theories, i.e., when the defendant is immune from suit or when the plaintiff claims a violation of a legal interest that clearly does … To state a § 1983 claim, Plaintiff must allege facts, when taken as true, “establish (1) the deprivation of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States (2) caused by a person acting under the color

EEOC v. The Ohio State University

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 21, 2022

Under that paradigm, the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing a prima facie case. … When Defendant submitted its “Request for Reduction in Work Force” form to its central Human Resources department, it had the opportunity to identify its proffered reason clearly.

Gragg v. UPS Pension Plan

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

As the Plan language clearly gives the Plan administrator exclusive authority in interpreting the Plans, this Court finds that “arbitrary and capricious” review appropriate. … Rather, they establish that while the plans were merged, the merger did not alter the nature or amount of accrued benefits.

Rodgers v. Morgan

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jun 11, 2020

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). … Accordingly, in drafting a complaint, a plaintiff must: (1) clearly state the underlying claim; and (2) include supporting facts that describe “official acts frustrating the litigation” to show actual injury.

Bishop v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation & Corrections

695 F. Supp. 2d 707 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 2, 2010

Davis, on one occasion, made a comment about women not being qualified to work as corrections officers. While this evidence shows that Lt. … ... burden to establish a prima facie case of retaliation “is not onerous.”

Williams v. Ohio Department of Rehab and Correction

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 26, 2019

Defendants therefore shoulder the burden of establishing that Plaintiff has not exhausted her administrative remedies. See id. … Eleventh Amendment Immunity Defendants maintain that the Eleventh Amendment extends immunity to them from Plaintiff’s attempt to recover monetary damages against them in their

Levell v. Monsanto Research Corp.

191 F.R.D. 543 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Feb 7, 2000

“The prospect of such a massive undertaking clearly counsels in favor of settlement.”, Id. 3. … In addition, hourly employees qualify for radiogenic disease insurance coverage once they have been employed for thirteen weeks, but salaried employees must be employed for six months before qualifying for the coverage.

Kister v. Ohio Board of Regents

365 F. Supp. 27 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jan 7, 1974

Finally, plaintiffs contend that the procedures established by House Bill 1219 do not meet due process standards. … The university cannot dismiss the student until this fact has been established.

Gibson v. City of Cincinnati

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 13, 2021

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. … Jan. 23, 2009) (finding that “bare allegations of a custom or policy, unsupported by any evidence, are insufficient to establish entitlement to relief.”); Biggin v.

Pope v. Trotwood-Madison City School District Board of Education

162 F. Supp. 2d 803 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Nov 29, 2000

What the defendants in this case clearly did not do was engage in arbitrary conduct intentionally designed to punish someone.... … Even if true, however, this allegation is insufficient to establish a substantive due process violation.