Case law

Igal v. the U.S. Consulate General in Johannesburg

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jun 7, 2024

Once the spouse is deemed “documentarily qualified,” he must complete an interview at the relevant U.S. Embassy. Akhter v. Blinken, No. 2:23-cv-1374, 2024 WL 1173905, at *1–2 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 19, 2024). … To establish such an interest, “the plaintiff must demonstrate that the Constitution or a federal or state statute grants [her] a protected right.” Id.

Heid v. Mohr

District Court, S.D. Ohio · May 28, 2020

. § 1654 “clearly makes no provision for a non-attorney’s representation of others.” Id. … A denial must fairly respond to the substance of the matter; and when good faith requires that a party qualify an answer or deny only a part of a matter, the answer must specify the part admitted and qualify or

Andrews

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Feb 6, 2026

See Blakley v. 3 Plaintiff had self-employment as a babysitter in 2009, 2013, and 2014, but her earnings did not meet the threshold to qualify as past relevant work. … The determination or decision must contain specific reasons for the weight given to the individual’s symptoms, be consistent with and supported by the evidence, and be clearly articulated so the

Zuern v. Tate

101 F. Supp. 2d 948 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jun 9, 2000

While Petitioner clearly knew the information contained within that memorandum, he did not know that the information had been included within a memorandum. … Prosecutor: There are a lot of things we don’t like to do, but you took an oath of office to do this, you qualified yourself as a juror. We are into the case now, and these are things that are kind of *976 frustrating.

Quinonez v. IMI Material Handling Logistics Inc.

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 8, 2023

P. 56 Summary judgment must be entered “against a party who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party’s case, and on which that party will bear the burden … The Sixth Circuit, however, has held that a formal affidavit or declaration may not be required when, as here, a party has clearly explained the need for more discovery prior to or contemporaneously with the motion for

Bush v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 16, 2023

She also relied on the fact that “despite orders to establish with pain management, for evaluation for opiate use for pain, the record does not show that the claimant ever established with such a provider during the period … And, as this Court has said, “[a]s ALJs are not qualified to interpret raw medical data, a RFC determination must be supported by medical opinions in the record.” Dillman v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 990 F.

United States Ex Rel. Roby v. Boeing Co.

100 F. Supp. 2d 619 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 24, 2000

Indeed, Defendant further alleges that, the Government, during the same time frame, contracted with Speco for the purchase of the same or similar aerospace parts at the same time it had many government-qualified assurance … Third, Defendant asserts that, Plaintiffs have not and cannot establish a claim for violation of the FCA due to the fact that Plaintiffs cannot establish the requisite intent element.

Corrill v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, S.D. Ohio · May 5, 2021

The ALJ “need not discuss listings that the [claimant] clearly does not meet, especially when the claimant does not raise the listing before the ALJ.” Sheeks v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 544 F. … Listing § 12.04 establishes the criteria for depressive, bipolar, and related disorders; and Listing § 12.06 establishes the criteria for anxiety and obsessive-compulsive disorders. See 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpt.

Brickles v. Village of Phillipsburg, Ohio

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 10, 2021

App’x 962, 966-67 (6th Cir. 2006) (“no rational individual could believe that sexual abuse by a state actor is constitutionally permissible under the Due Process Clause and … a citizen has a clearly established right under … any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities

Hernandez-Butler v. IKEA U.S. East, LLC

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jan 27, 2020

Under Ohio law, to establish negligence Hernandez-Butler must establish that: (1) IKEA owed a duty of care to her; (2) IKEA breached that duty; and (3) IKEA’s breach was both a but-for and proximate cause of Hernandez-Butler … At the same time, the qualifier—if the box is sitting flat on the pallet—perhaps bears some additional scrutiny.

Cantrell v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 3, 2022

[Plaintiff] was a younger individual age 18-44, on the established disability onset date (20 CFR 202.1563 and 416.963). 8. … Hence, ALJ Knapp carefully considered the totality of the evidence, applied the proper standards, and clearly explained her credibility findings.

Whetstone v. United of Omaha Life Insurance Company

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

As an F&S employee, Whetstone participated in an ERISA-qualified benefit plan (the “Plan”) administered by United. … In that vein, claimants have been awarded benefits when “objective medical evidence clearly established the claimant’s disability, even in circumstances where the plan administrator’s decision-making process

Fernandes v. Commissioner of Social Security

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

Based on these findings, the ALJ concluded that Plaintiff was not under a benefits-qualifying disability. Id. at 61. … Hence, ALJ Adkins carefully considered the totality of the evidence, applied the proper standards, and clearly explained his consistency/credibility findings.

Donaldson v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Feb 17, 2022

Based on these findings, the ALJ concluded that Plaintiff was not under a benefits-qualifying disability. Id. at 75-76. … Hence, ALJ Kenyon carefully considered the totality of the evidence, applied the proper standards, and clearly explained his credibility findings.

Bailey v. Houk

District Court, S.D. Ohio · May 20, 2022

to be told “in what respects he falls short of qualifying for parole.” 442 U.S. at 16. … Clearly, some of it is true. He was, after all, convicted of aggravated murder. Plaintiff failed to specify what exactly was false or to allege any facts or circumstances which would plausibly support the assertion.

Scenicview Estates, LLC v. Eclipse Resources I, LP

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 10, 2022

The Lease clearly and unambiguously defines “operations” to include “preliminary or preparatory work necessary for drilling” and “conducting internal technical analysis.” … Such a reading of the Lease (which gives “operations” a wide berth by setting out a non-exhaustive but still extensive list of qualifying activities) would be unreasonable and inconsistent with the Lease Construction provision

Elsayed v. National Credit Systems Inc

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

To establish liability under the TCPA, Plaintiff must establish that Defendant’s telephone system is an ATDS, one capable of randomly or sequentially dialing or texting telephone numbers ., 786 F. … As such, the NCS telephone system did not qualify as an ATDS under the TCPA. No contradictory evidence is offered by Plaintiff.

Thacker v. Warden, Noble Correctional Institution

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

merits a federal constitutional claim later presented to a federal habeas court, the federal court must defer to the state court decision unless that decision is contrary to or an objectively unreasonable application of clearly … established precedent of the Supreme Court of the United States. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1); Harrington v.

Williams v. Warden, Madison Correctional Institution

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 20, 2024

“A decision is ‘contrary to’ clearly established federal law when ‘the state court arrives at a conclusion opposite to that reached by the [Supreme] Court on a question of law or if the state court decides a case differently … “A state court’s adjudication only results in an ‘unreasonable application’ of clearly established federal law when ‘the state court identifies the correct governing legal principle from the [Supreme] Court’s decisions

Haywood v. Gifford

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 21, 2021

Depo. at PAGEID 189, 197, 203; see Doc. 10 at PAGEID 77), is clearly refuted by the video evidence such that no reasonable jury could believe it. Scott, 550 U.S. at 380. … Gifford’s declaration and the video evidence further establish that Gifford attempted to place plaintiff into his cell using an arm escort technique.