Case law

Ohio Republican Party v. Brunner

582 F. Supp. 2d 957 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Oct 9, 2008

Finally, if the new registrants are not qualified, they can still vote absentee or in person on election day, therefore diluting the votes of those qualified voters. … This will cause irreparable harm to Plaintiffs and all qualified voters because each of their votes will be diluted by the votes of those who are not qualified.

Lloyd v. Pokorny

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

The Portage Defendants have raised the qualified immunity defense and, thus, it is now Plaintiffs’ burden to establish first, that Defendants violated a constitutional right and, second, that the right was clearly established … “To survive the motion to dismiss on qualified immunity grounds, the plaintiff must allege facts that ‘plausibly mak[e] out a claim that the defendant's conduct violated a constitutional right that was clearly established

First Baptist Church of Glen Este v. State of Ohio

591 F. Supp. 676 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Oct 24, 1983

Some courts have taken an “activist” view, insuring that the congregation has followed established procedures in disciplinary proceedings. … With respect to a hierarchical church, however, the Court has clearly espoused a “hands-off” policy when courts *682 are asked to review such matters. See Serbian Orthodox Diocese v.

D.J. Miller & Associates, Inc. v. Ohio Department of Administrative Services

115 F. Supp. 2d 872 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 18, 2000

Id. 3 The State does not enjoy Eleventh Amendment immunity for violations of Title VI. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000d-7(a)(l). … Without direct evidence, to establish a prima facie case of race discrimination under Title VII, a plaintiff must establish: (1) he was a member of a protected class, (2) he suffered an adverse action, (3) that he was qualified

Porter v. United States

619 F. Supp. 137 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · May 21, 1985

Because the issue is one of a limited waiver of sovereign immunity, the issue is particularly sensitive: It is well settled that the United States, as sovereign, is immune from suit except as it consents to be sued and that … We find no merit to this argument, as the decision whether to impose a stricter set of regulations than those extant is clearly discretionary. Miller, 522 F.2d at 387 . We turn to plaintiffs' other claim.

Smith v. City of Dayton, Ohio

68 F. Supp. 2d 911 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 7, 1999

This is not a case where a city was carrying out a. state law which had already been held unconstitutional, which would clearly come within § 1983. … Nor does the City of Dayton claim any immunity here on grounds the law was not clearly established. Rather, it acknowledges that no immunity defense is available to a municipality. 6 .

Lee v. Javitch, Block & Rathbone, LLP

522 F. Supp. 2d 945 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Nov 7, 2007

While these statements are clearly dicta on the immunity question actually decided, this Court believes they accurately reflect Ohio law. … The standards for summary judgment are well established.

Schorle v. City of Greenhills

524 F. Supp. 821 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Feb 26, 1981

When a judge knows he lacks jurisdiction, or acts in the face of clearly valid statutes or case law expressly depriving him of jurisdiction, judicial immunity is lost. Rankin v. Howard, 633 F.2d 844 (9th Cir. 1980). … Jurisdiction being clearly absent under these circumstances, Mr. Otting has lost his cloak of judicial immunity, and defendant’s motion to dismiss him as a party defendant must therefore be denied.

White v. Erdos

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 29, 2022

immunity. … To prevail over a qualified immunity defense, White would have the burden of proof to demonstrate Defendants had violated a clearly established constitutional right. See Harlow v.

Federal Property Management Corp. v. Harris

448 F. Supp. 560 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 15, 1978

The contracts provide that defendants will pay each plaintiff a percentage of the established basic rent for each qualified tenant. … Clearly, authority to set-off payments is subsumed in the right of termination. Plaintiffs’ assertion that such a set-off is an illegal impoundment of appropriated funds is without merit.

White v. Erdos

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Feb 16, 2022

Qualified Immunity Assuming Plaintiff has met his burden of establishing a violation of his Eighth Amendment rights, which he has not, Defendants are entitled to qualified … Thus, a governmental official performing discretionary functions will be entitled to qualified immunity unless his actions violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Gammarino, Trustee v. Sycamore Township

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

Finally, they contended that all Defendants enjoyed state-law immunity for all state-law claims, including qualified immunity, legislative immunity, and political subdivision immunity. (Id.). … Here too, immunity plays a role. Ohio Revised Code § 2744.03 grants government employees acting within the scope of their official responsibilities qualified immunity with limited exceptions.

CSM Federal Credit Union v. Lange (In Re Lange)

40 B.R. 554 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 19, 1984

Judge Perlman further found that reliance was clearly reasonable with regard to the first loan only. … Thus, we cannot say that Judge Perlman’s conclusions of law are incorrect nor his findings of fact clearly erroneous.

El-Bey v. Wallace

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

Qualified immunity requires the Court to “determine whether the facts of this case parallel a prior decision or not for purposes of determining whether a right is clearly established.” Saalim v. … Even if it were not supported by probable cause, defendants are entitled to qualified immunity for plaintiff’s arrest because they did not violate plaintiff’s clearly established constitutional right.

McRae v. Lendsey

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

Qualified Immunity Beyond challenging the merits of Plaintiff’s constitutional claims, Defendant has asserted qualified immunity as a defense. … Since the Defendant has raised the qualified immunity defense, Plaintiff bears the burden of showing that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity. Johnson v.

Mell v. Anthem, Inc.

264 F.R.D. 312 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Nov 4, 2009

The City similarly argued in its Response (doc. 39), and at the hearing, that the exception to the City’s immunity under Ohio Rev. … that they qualify under Rule 23(b)(3).

Cooey v. Kasich

801 F. Supp. 2d 623 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 8, 2011

Voorhies characterizes the missing information as “a quality control issue on our timeline” and offers that “there, clearly, is room for improvement in terms of quality of our timeline.” … The burden falls squarely to the plaintiff, who must overcome the presumption of rationality by alleging that the defendant acted in a manner clearly contrary to law. Id.

Ohio Police & Fire Pension Fund v. Standard & Poor's Financial Services, LLC

813 F. Supp. 2d 871 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 26, 2011

The Rating Agencies offer numerous other grounds for why the § 1707.41 claim (as well as the § 1707.43 and negligent misrepresentation claims) should be dismissed, including that their ratings enjoy absolute immunity under … To establish a claim under this section, a purchaser must prove that a violation of § 1707 took place.

Cook v. Sicilian

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Oct 23, 2020

“To determine whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, a court evaluates two independent prongs: whether the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right, and whether that right was clearly established … Accordingly, Plaintiff’s claim fails at the first prong of the qualified immunity inquiry.

Soriano v. Xavier University Corporation

687 F. Supp. 1188 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Apr 26, 1988

Therefore, defendants’ arguments are premised on first amendment concerns relating to the free exercise and establishment clauses. … Absent this substantial risk, courts have not rendered large groups of employers immune from liability, as such exemption would substantially frustrate the intent and purpose of the federal laws.