Case law

Dadone v. Saul, Commissioner of Social Security

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

To establish a procedural due process claim under 42 U.S.C. … However, Plaintiff clearly alleges that Hamilton County JFS provided her with a notice concerning the cut-off of her state Medicaid benefits.

Myers v. Village of New Holland

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Apr 25, 2022

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Qualified immunity is a two-step analysis: this Court must determine whether the officers violated Plaintiff’s constitutional rights, and if so, whether those rights were clearly established at the time.

American Premier Underwriters Inc. v. General Electric Co.

900 F. Supp. 2d 753 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 28, 2012

Similarly, under Pennsylvania law, “[t]o establish a right to indemnification where a case is resolved by settlement, the party must establish that the settlement was reasonable, that the underlying claim was valid against … No inference from words of general import can establish such indemnification.”).

Libertarian Party v. Husted

33 F. Supp. 3d 914 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 14, 2014

Plaintiffs turn next to case law considering absolute judicial immunity from liability and argue that those cases require that decisionmakers be truly independent in order to be entitled to immunity. … The District Judge, upon consideration of the motion, shall set aside any part of this Order found to be clearly erroneous or contrary to law.

Druhot v. Smith

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 11, 2024

qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shields 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 would have

Cooper v. City of Columbus, Ohio

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Feb 22, 2022

An official is entitled to the defense of qualified immunity so long as he has not violated a “clearly established statutory or constitutional right[] of which a reasonable person would have known.” Mullenix v. … make out a violation of a constitutional right,” and (2) determine whether that right was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct. Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232 (2009).

Buck v. Fries & Fries, Inc.

953 F. Supp. 896 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Dec 26, 1996

Summary judgment is clearly proper “against a party who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to the party’s ease and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial … The Monette Court recognized that, pursuant to McDonnell Douglas, a plaintiff may establish a prima facie case of discrimination by establishing that: 1) she is a member of a protected class; 2) she is qualified for the position

Gaines v. Cross

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 18, 2025

in her official capacity and qualified immunity in her individual capacity. … Even if Judge Cross were not entitled to qualified immunity, Defendants argue that she failed to state a claim for relief. (Id.)

A. & N. Furniture & Appliance Company v. United States

271 F. Supp. 40 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Apr 24, 1967

A Corporation having more than one class of stock does not qualify as a small business corporation * * *. … The test of validity of a regulation is well established. Treasury regulations must be sustained unless unreasonable and plainly inconsistent with the revenue statutes. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v.

Mercer v. Athens County, Ohio

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 22, 2022

a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.” … federal qualified immunity analysis.’”

Streck

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jan 2, 2026

to qualified immunity. … at PageID 176); and that he is protected from liability by the doctrines of qualified immunity and political subdivision immunity (id. at PageID 176-178). A.

Berridge v. Heiser

993 F. Supp. 1136 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Dec 4, 1997

Heiser, for oral arguments pursuant to Southern District of Ohio Local Rules 7.1(b)(1); and (2) Defendant Heiser’s motion to dismiss on the basis of qualified immunity are MOOT. This case is TERMINATED. I. … immunity are MOOT.

Miller v. City of Cincinnati

709 F. Supp. 2d 605 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Nov 19, 2008

immunity. … (Doc. 28, ¶ 66) Therefore, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is DENIED on the basis of qualified immunity. III. CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing, it is hereby ORDERED that: *628 1.

United States v. Miami University

91 F. Supp. 2d 1132 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 20, 2000

The court had to determine whether the federal agencies and officials were protected from liability by qualified immunity. … The standard for qualified immunity required the court to determine whether the federal officials’ “failure to terminate funding to local law enforcement agencies violated statutory or constitutional duties clearly established

Santino v. Columbus Public Schools

833 F. Supp. 2d 780 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jun 24, 2011

In the absence of direct evidence of discrimination, a plaintiff must set forth a prima facie case of discrimination by demonstrating: (1) he is a member of a protected class; (2) he was qualified for the job; (3) he suffered … Plaintiff may establish that defendant’s proffered reason is mere pretext by establishing that it: (1) has no basis in fact; (2) did not actually motivate plaintiffs termination; or (3) was insufficient to warrant plaintiffs

Martin v. W.E. Monks & Co.

805 F. Supp. 500 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jun 3, 1992

The Court finds that Edwards’ involvement in Monks’ policies and work situations, as well as his influence over the hiring, firing, and compensation of Monks employees, clearly establish that he qualifies as an employer under … Edwards’ joint liability by virtue of his managerial role is established by the “employer” analysis, as previously determined.

Coleman v. Oninku

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

Qualified Immunity Defendants last argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because Coleman cannot demonstrate the objective or subjective components of the Eighth … Defendants’ request for qualified immunity is DENIED. IV.

In re Johnston

15 Ohio Misc. 207 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jan 30, 1968

On the other hand, Bartram and Biddinger have been often cited and seem to be firmly established and accepted as Ohio law. See 27 Ohio Jurisprudence 2d 504, Section 48 Homesteads. … With to-days’ land values and building costs only a squalid hovel on a spit of the wonderful world of Ohio would qualify.

Dennis v. Ohio State Teachers Retirement Board

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

The Magistrate Judge recommends dismissing all claims against the Individual Defendants based on qualified immunity. (Doc. 37 at 20–23). … “The caselaw analyzing Eleventh Amendment immunity has not treated the Ernst factors, or the considerations relevant to any one of them, as a checklist that must be satisfied to establish immunity.”

Doe v. Nelsonville-York School District Board of Education

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

Defendant claims statutory immunity from Plaintiff’s state law claims under Ohio’s Political Subdivision Tort Liability Act. … Plaintiffs argue that Defendant is not immune because it showed discriminatory intent by failing to follow the school’s harassment policy. (ECF No. 20 at 10.)