Case law

Suboh v. Abacus Corporation

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Oct 18, 2022

Otherwise qualified. “To show that she is otherwise qualified for a position . . . an employee must show that she can perform the essential functions of a job with or without an accommodation.” … She sought a more clearly defined role, the ability to prioritize major projects, a deeper bench of recruiters, a salesperson with local market ties, additional education and training for staff, and more direction from

Harris

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Dec 11, 2025

In contrast, the only email written by Harris that’s part of the record states clearly that she won’t resign “as requested.” (See Doc. 19-6). … To establish a prima facie case for failure to accommodate, an employee must show that (1) he was disabled within the meaning of the ADA; (2) he was otherwise qualified for his position, with or without reasonable accommodation

Morrow v. Tri County Jail

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 31, 2023

violation of a legal interest which clearly does not exist. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327. … App’x 265, 266 (6th Cir. 2003) (setting forth requirements for a putative “next friend” and stating that the “putative next friend must clearly establish ‘the propriety of his status’ in order to ‘justify the jurisdiction

Finley v. Miami University

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Feb 1, 2022

As to Miami’s claim of sovereign immunity, Finley argued only that the state could have (and, in her view, should have) waived that immunity to “avoid the inconvenience of multiple fora.” … And, although the Court evaluates the Complaint by what it contains, rather than what it might contain, the Court shares Miami’s sense that if a relevant provision of the Handbook clearly established the tentative

United States v. Floyd

247 F. Supp. 2d 889 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Oct 15, 2002

be suppressed, in accordance with the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule, established in Leon . … (“Clearly, Brady recognizes no distinction between evidence which serves to impeach a government witness’ credibility and evidence which is directly exculpatory of the defendant.”).

Lucas v. Cassidy

District Court, S.D. Ohio · May 15, 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. … Plaintiff similarly raises claims under the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which provides that “[no] State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of

Heid v. Mohr

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

Clearly, this is a legitimate interest.”) (citing Pell v. Procunier, 417 U.S. 817, 823 (1974)). … The Undersigned notes, however, that the Court only rejected Defendants’ qualified immunity argument at the Motion to Dismiss stage because it appeared to have been copied and pasted from one of Plaintiffs’ related cases

Smith v. Streck <i>et al.</i>

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 5, 2024

immunity. … This amounts only to a conclusory allegation and does not meet the standard established by precedent that a Plaintiff must meet to survive a motion to dismiss on a § 1983 claim for inadequate training and supervision.

Cheatham v. Postal Service (U.S)

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 14, 2020

To establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination under the Rehabilitation Act, Plaintiff must show that: (1) she is disabled, (2) she was otherwise qualified for the job, with or without reasonable accommodation … Race Discrimination Under Title VII Similarly, to establish a prima facie case of race discrimination, a plaintiff must show that: (1) they are a member of a protected class, (2) they were qualified for the job, (

Remillard v. Warden Noble Correctional Institution

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

Ed. 2d 678, 683circuit precedent does not constitute “clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court,” 28 U.S.C. §2254(d)(1). … Nor can the Sixth Circuit's reliance on its own precedents be defended in this case on the ground that they merely reflect what has been “clearly established” by our cases.

General Acquisition, Inc. v. GenCorp Inc.

766 F. Supp. 1460 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · May 25, 1990

“The degree of control necessary to establish agency has not been clearly defined.” Hanson, 24 Ohio St.3d at 175 , 494 N.E.2d at 1095 . There is no minimum threshold that must be met. … This language, however, is qualified by the courts discussion of section 551.

Rice v. Jones

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 27, 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. … See Nutt, 2020 WL 581837, at *4 (plaintiff’s motion to amend complaint should be denied where allegations have not been meaningfully altered to establish basis for reinstating plaintiff’s previously dismissed claims).

Cook v. Scioto County Jail

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 3, 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. … “It is firmly established that a municipality, or as in this case a county, cannot be held liable under § 1983 for an injury inflicted solely by its employees or agents.” Gregory v.

United Government Security Officers of America v. Akal Security, Inc.

475 F. Supp. 2d 732 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Oct 30, 2006

Stratton Indus., Inc., 798 F.2d 913, 915 (6th Cir.1986)) (“The plaintiff bears the burden of establishing, by a preponderance of the evidence, the existence of federal subject matter jurisdiction.”) … Thus, this Court finds that the conduct alleged in Plaintiffs’ NLRA claim clearly falls within what is “actually or arguably protected or prohibited under Sections 7 or 8 of NLRA.”

Wolfe v. Hocking County Sheriff's Department

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 26, 2024

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. … “It is firmly established that a municipality, or as in this case a county, cannot be held liable under § 1983 for an injury inflicted solely by its employees or agents.” Gregory v.

Solis v. City of Columbus

319 F. Supp. 2d 797 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · May 26, 2004

There are two essential elements of a § 1983 claim: (1) there must be a deprivation of the plaintiffs “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws” of the United States; and (2) the plaintiff must … The City clearly was on notice that officers going to the wrong address is *807 a recurring problem in the execution of search warrants, particularly no-knock search warrants. 5 As early as 1963, Supreme Court Justice Brennan

Spengler v. Worthington Cylinders

438 F. Supp. 2d 805 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jun 16, 2006

Section 4112.05 and 4112.08 of the Ohio Revised Code clearly preclude the judicial remedies under state law only if a charge, in writing and under oath, is filed with the OCRC within six months of an alleged discriminatory … Despite the holdings in Lafferty and McLaughlin , several recent decisions by *810 district courts within the Sixth Circuit have held that the mere filing of a charge with the EEOC qualifies as an election of remedy pursuant

Pierson v. Neil

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

Casey, 518 U.S. at 351 (“[A]n inmate cannot establish relevant actual injury simply by establishing that his prison's law library or legal assistance program is subpar in some theoretical sense.”); Schick v. … Plaintiff’s allegations fail to establish that Defendants were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs.

SASC, LLC v. School Supply Connection, Inc., <i>et al.</i>

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 13, 2024

Finally, Peyton and SSC both assert that the alleged transfer of SASC’s materials to APlus cannot qualify as a fraudulent transfer because APlus is a fictitious name of SSC. … Ill. 2018)(“one clearly cannot transfer property to oneself. It is a conceptual absurdity.”) In re Wolf at 789, fn. 43.

Melvin B. Clark v. Franklin County Probation Department

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 27, 2026

The Sixth Circuit employs a three-prong test, initially established in Maupin v. … Clark cannot establish a factual basis for a Confrontation Clause claim. The record unquestionably establishes that he was provided with the opportunity to cross-examine every state witness at trial.