Case law

Kinley v. Bradshaw

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 18, 2023

Instead, the Ohio courts have clearly indicated that § 2953.23 denies courts subject matter jurisdiction over claims that cannot meet the statute’s stringent requirements. … Another factor for assessing reliability is whether there was a suspect motive for the recantation, such as to avoid prosecution, and whether, concomitantly, the original statement or testimony was given without immunity

Lockhart v. Marietta City Schools

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Nov 18, 2020

Yet Plaintiff also seems to allege that Defendants failed to accommodate her disability, (see Doc. 1, ¶ 42), even though that claim is not clearly brought. … Under this framework, Plaintiff bears the initial burden to establish her prima facie case.

Withrow v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jan 9, 2020

Sanders, who concluded that Plaintiff was not under a benefits-qualifying disability. … This meant that she was not under a benefits-qualifying disability. This ended the ALJ’s sequential evaluation at step 4. Id. at 79-80.

Sivils v. Commissioner of Social Security

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

. #10, PageID #s 47-54).2 Based on these findings, the ALJ concluded that Plaintiff was not under a benefits-qualifying disability. Id. at 54-55. … Hence, ALJ Barnes carefully considered the totality of the evidence, applied the proper standards, and clearly explained his credibility findings.

Butler v. Aetna U.S. Healthcare, Inc.

109 F. Supp. 2d 856 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 28, 2000

(iii) The plan or contract is not qualified under the “Internal Revenue Code of 1986,” 100 Stat.2085, 26 U.S.C. 1, as amended. … Unlike the plaintiffs in Wells , however, Butler clearly knew, before her plan benefits ever commenced, that any retroactive Social Security disability award she might receive was payable to Aetna.

Shank v. Givesurance Insurance Services, Inc.

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

Article Ili Standing To establish standing, the Supreme Court has held that the plaintiff must establish an injury in fact, traceable to the challenged conduct of the defendant, and a favorable judgment must be likely … Ct. at 1168 n. 2 (text message assumed to qualify as a call “without considering or resolving the issue”).

Jamison v. Stuart Lippman and Associates

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 2, 2021

“To maintain an action under the FDCPA, the Sixth Circuit clearly teaches that the debt at issue must arise out of a consumer transaction involving primarily personal, family, or household purposes.” Meyer v. … Plaintiff argues that the fact that Defendant Jimenez sent “letters” to Ohio should be sufficient to establish her minimum contacts with the State of Ohio. (Doc. 12 at 8-9).

MESA Industries, Inc. v. Charter Industrial Supply, Inc.

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Apr 7, 2022

Turning to the merits of the Motion for TRO, “[a] temporary restraining order is an extraordinary remedy that should only be granted if the movant can clearly show the need for one.” Kendall Holdings, Ltd. v. … Ohio Sept. 20, 2013), Mesa has at least shown a substantial likelihood that the AST Database and Application Drawings qualify.

Walker v. L Brands, Inc.

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Oct 16, 2020

Burgdoerfer should have qualified his statements with a warning that there was a risk of dividend reduction in the foreseeable future, which Plaintiff qualified as the following six to 12 months. … Even more compelling, it is clear to the Court that the deficiencies in this case cannot be cured; the facts are what they are and they are not sufficient to establish securities fraud.

Nurein v. Warden, Noble Correctional Institution

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 8, 2024

Statements qualify as testimonial if they have a “primary purpose” of “establish[ing] or prov[ing] past events potentially relevant to later criminal prosecution.” Davis v. … Nurein’s burden in habeas, then, is to show this decision was contrary to or an objectively unreasonable application of clearly established Supreme Court precedent. The only authority on which he relies is Faretta v.

Sims v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Nov 17, 2021

Based on these findings, the ALJ concluded that Plaintiff was not under a benefits-qualifying disability. Id. at 107. … Hence, ALJ Kenyon carefully considered the totality of the evidence, applied the proper standards, and clearly explained his credibility findings.

Boyd

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Dec 8, 2025

Rape can be established when the two participants start the encounter on a consensual basis, “but the consent is revoked by words, actions or conduct that clearly communicates non-consent, the … established precedent of the United States Supreme Court. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1); Harrington v.

Baughman v. KTH Parts Industries, Inc

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

The Supreme Court concluded that “it would be difficult to conjure up an instance where changing clothes and showering are more clearly an integral and indispensable part of the principal activity of the employment … Court held that time spent by steelworkers in the donning or doffing of their flame-retardant jacket, pants, hood, hardhat, snood, wristlets, work gloves, leggings, and metatarsal boots, “the protective gear at issue,” “qualifies

Watson v. Ray

90 F.R.D. 143 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Apr 29, 1981

It clearly appears that the Court, to further the intent and purpose of Rule 23 and satisfy the direct mandate of subsection (e) to protect class members, should exercise its authority in this manner. … A reclassification process will be established which will provide for a periodic review of all inmates in the system.

Terry v. Foreman

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

(i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … Id. at 540 (“The law from the United States Supreme Court and the Sixth Circuit has been clearly established for decades that ‘homosexuals do constitute an ‘identifiable group’ for equal protection purposes.’”)

Women's Medical Professional Corp. v. Taft

114 F. Supp. 2d 664 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 22, 2000

Disseminated intravascular coagulation is a condition in which foreign proteins enter a woman’s immune system, resulting in spontaneous bleeding. {Id.; PL Exh. 18 at 45). 31 . … It provides that "no bill shall contain more than one subject, which shall be clearly expressed in its title.” See State ex rel. Ohio Academy of Trial Lawyers v.

Ly

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Aug 26, 2026

Ohio April 10, 2026) (“As [is] well established in the Sixth Circuit . . . the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over removal-based claims.” (citing Hamama v. … A preliminary injunction is an “extraordinary remedy which should be granted only if the movant carries his or her burden of proving that the circumstances clearly demand it.” Overstreet v.

Roush v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Nov 30, 2022

Legal Framework for Disability Determinations To qualify for disability benefits, a claimant must suffer from a medically determinable physical or mental impairment that can be expected to result … 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 individual

Thacker v. Warden Noble Correctional Institution

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Nov 2, 2022

Thacker has presented no new evidence of his actual innocence and thus does not qualify for that exception to procedural default. … The alleged error must have ‘substantially affected the outcome of the trial,’ such that ‘but for the error, the outcome of the trial clearly would have been otherwise.’ ”(Citations omitted.)

Carswell v. Edwards

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Apr 27, 2023

City of Paducah, 890 F.2d 831, 834 (6th Cir. 1989)) (“mere speculation and conjecture are insufficient to establish the existence of an agreement” for a conspiracy claim). … Treadway, 75 F.3d 230, 240 (6th Cir. 1996) (“Sixth Circuit precedent clearly holds that new parties may not be added after the statute of limitations has run”); Moore v.