Case law

Chitwood v. Dunbar Armored, Inc.

267 F. Supp. 2d 751 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 27, 2003

Oct. 3, 1996), Plaintiff argues that he only need to demonstrate that he is objectively qualified for his position in order to establish his prima facie case (Id.). … LEXIS 26305, persuasive for the proposition that he has adequately established that he was objectively qualified.

Boden v. Anaconda Minerals Co.

757 F. Supp. 848 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Feb 5, 1990

Inherent within those aforementioned cases dealing with qualified privilege is the essential element of good faith. One must establish a good faith basis as to the subject matter communicated. … However, contained within the Supervisor’s Handbook are two sections which clearly establish that “for cause” may not always be the case.

Ridinger v. General Motors Corporation

325 F. Supp. 1089 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 24, 1971

Southern Bell has clearly not met that burden here. They introduced no evidence concerning the lifting abilities of women. … Under the Ohio statutory scheme for regulating and restricting female employment, the fact that the plaintiffs may be equally as qualified as men to work overtime or hold a particular job is irrelevant.

Bacon v. Secretary of the Air Force

785 F. Supp. 1255 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Dec 4, 1991

Although the testimony and exhibits do not clearly establish the dates of the GS-7 interviews and the date(s) Mr. … In order to establish a prima facia case of racial discrimination, the plaintiff must establish facts to show that: (1) plaintiff belonged to a protected class; (2) plaintiff applied and was qualified for a job for which

Pridemore v. Rural Legal Aid Soc. of W. Cent. Ohio

625 F. Supp. 1180 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Nov 19, 1985

Green, 411 U.S. 792 , 93 S.Ct. 1817 , 36 L.Ed.2d 668 (1972), were adapted to cases of handicap discrimination as follows: (1) The plaintiff must establish a prima facie case by showing that he was an otherwise qualified handicapped … Clearly, then, these two major life activities of Plaintiff cannot be found to be substantially limited by his borderline cerebral palsy.

Mitchell Ex Rel. Mitchell v. Walter

538 F. Supp. 1111 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · May 14, 1982

. § 794 , which prohibits the exclusion of a qualified individual from participation in any federally funded program on account of his handicap. … In order to qualify for federal assistance, a state must meet a number of requirements.

White v. Honda of America Mfg., Inc.

191 F. Supp. 2d 933 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 21, 2002

that he or she is “disabled.” 2) The plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that he or she is “otherwise qualified” for the position despite his or her disability; a) without accommodation from the employer; b) with … The liability clearly does not extend to mere insults, indignities, threats, annoyances, petty oppressions, or other trivialities.

Turner v. Davis

District Court, S.D. Ohio · May 27, 2021

“Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, ‘government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … “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

Campbell v. Hamilton County

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

Qualified immunity Defendants maintain that the individual Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on all of Plaintiff’s Section 1983 claims. … right ‘was clearly established when the event occurred so that a reasonable offic[ial] would have known that his conduct violated it.’”

Hora v. Risner

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Nov 13, 2019

The Third Circuit also held that Diehl was not entitled to qualified immunity. … An official familiar with the facts then known and the law then applicable would have reasonably believed that his conduct was violating clearly established law. Id. at 149 (citing Fuentes v.

Citizens Organized to Defend the Environment, Inc. v. Volpe

353 F. Supp. 520 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Dec 15, 1972

One final caveat must be clearly stated in connection with judicial review of administrative actions. The Court does not act in place of the administra-, tor. … Clearly the NEPA ■ contemplates some federal actions which are -minor, or have so little environmental impact, as to fall outside its scope. See, Hanly v.

Manuel v. City of Columbus

200 F. Supp. 2d 842 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · May 6, 2002

In other words, unlike the officer in Painter who was denied qualified immunity after he ignored a known legal justification for the suspect’s actions, the officers here did consider all of the facts before them, taking into … Immunity The Defendants have argued that'they are entitled either to federal qualified immunity or state statutory immunity with respect to each of the Plaintiffs claims.

Walters v. Jones

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

Jones Is Not Entitled To Qualified Immunity. … was clearly established when [the defendant] acted.’”

McCain v. Jackson

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Oct 15, 2020

to qualified immunity. … 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

Coleman v. Burghy

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

Second, Plaintiffs object to the Magistrate Judge’s report on qualified immunity. (Id. at 6). Third, Plaintiffs object to the denial of appointed counsel. (Id. at 7). … Plaintiffs’ second objection concerns qualified immunity. (Id. at 6). This objection relies on the Court sustaining Plaintiffs’ first objection, which this Court has not done.

Gies v. Flack

495 F. Supp. 2d 854 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 6, 2007

Sovereign Immunity Defendants argue that summary judgment is proper because Plaintiffs claims are barred by sovereign immunity. … Although Garvie considered only whether such a liberty right was “clearly established,” the Sixth Circuit subsequently held that where a tenured professor was removed as department head but was unable to show any harm or

Carney v. Columbus City Schools Board of Education

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Apr 21, 2020

“Qualified immunity shields public officials who perform discretionary functions from tort liability, so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established rights viewed under the applicable constitutional standard … been violated, and (2) whether that right was clearly established.”

Tomlin v. United States Air Force Medical Center

369 F. Supp. 353 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jan 17, 1974

If no arbitrariness is found, the Court will and should defer to administrative expertise in adjudicating grievances through currently established procedures which are part of present federal employment practices. … (emphasis added) A plaintiff, therefore, may not immunize himself from discipline by a mere assertion of discrimination.

McKinney v. Paddock

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 15, 2022

Qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … qualified immunity.”

Chiles v. Bowen

695 F. Supp. 357 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jun 17, 1988

The SSA wage records are silent as to any qualifying wages paid to plaintiff from 1936 to 1943. … establish both the amount of wages paid and the time of such payment.