Case law

Hillman

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 11, 2026

Plaintiff also addresses at length principles that were not raised by the Magistrate Judge, such as the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and qualified immunity. (ECF No. 15-1, PageID 304–07, 315–17.) As set forth in 28 U.S.C. … The rest of Plaintiff’s specific objections focus on immunity. (ECF No. 15-1, PageID 300–01.)

Harvey v. Franklin County, OH

District Court, S.D. Ohio · May 25, 2023

“It is well established that judges and other court officers enjoy absolute immunity from suit on claims arising out of the performance of judicial or quasi- judicial functions.” Foster v. … Because the Court finds that Harvey has failed to state a § 1983 claim against Baldwin, it need not address whether he is entitled to qualified immunity.

Mayhan

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 31, 2026

“Simply put, to establish liability and to overcome a qualified immunity defense, an individual must show that his or her own rights were violated, and that the violation was committed personally by the defendant.” … Instead, “[a] failure-to-train claim … requires a showing of ‘prior instances of unconstitutional conduct demonstrating that the [municipality] ha[d] ignored a history of abuse and was clearly on notice that the training

Games Galore of Ohio, Inc. v. Masminster

154 F. Supp. 2d 1292 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 3, 2001

But when a complaint omits facts that, if they existed, would clearly dominate the case, it seems fair to assume that those facts do not exist. Scheid v. Fanny Farmer Candy Shops, Inc., 859 F.2d 434, 437 (6th Cir.1988). … To establish a claim under § 1983, two elements are required: (1) conduct committed by a person acting under the color of state law that (2) deprives plaintiffs of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution

Pollitt v. Bramel

669 F. Supp. 172 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 10, 1987

applied for and was qualified to rent or purchase certain property or housing; 3) That he or she was rejected; and 4) That the housing or rental property remained available thereafter. … There is no dispute over whether the Pol-litts were qualified to rent from the Bra-mels.

Bonds v. Berne Union Local Schools

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

The burden is on Plaintiff to establish that this, or any of the exceptions to statutory immunity, apply in this case. Allen v. Clark, No. 1:13–CV–00326, 2014 WL 3016075, at *9 (S.D. … As such, most state-created rights that qualify for procedural due process protections do not rise to the level of substantive due process protection. Id.

Black v. Ohio Industrial Commission

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 12, 2023

Bitzer, 427 U.S. 445, 447–448 (1976) (Title VII abrogates state sovereign immunity); Kovacevich v. Kent State Univ., 224 F.3d 806, 816 (6th Cir. 2000) (Equal Pay Act abrogates state sovereign immunity). … immunity under the Eleventh Amendment of the United States Constitution.”

Taylor v. United States Postal Service

771 F. Supp. 882 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Nov 29, 1990

Taylor Has Failed To Establish That He Is A “Handicapped Person.” DECISION Taylor argues that he qualifies as a “handicapped person” under all three criteria of § 1613.702(a). … He further argues that his back injury clearly falls within the definition of “handicapped” enunciated in School Board of Nassau County v. Arline, 480 U.S. 273 , 107 S.Ct. 1123, 1127 , 94 L.Ed.2d 307 (1987). Id. at 36.

Randolph v. Bath & Body Works, Inc.

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Apr 23, 2025

claims and to recommend dismissal of Plaintiff’s Complaint, or any portion of it, which is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Taking the second requirement first, Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to state clearly the precise nature of his position at Bath and Body.

Creech v. Ohio Casualty Insurance

944 F. Supp. 1347 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 20, 1996

Accordingly, 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 case and on which that party will bear the burden of … was considered for a position for which she was qualified, (3) she was not hired, and (4) another person who was not a member of her protected class was given the position.

Mishos v. McKesson Corporation

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 12, 2023

Neither condition she proposes qualifies as “an actual or perceived physical or mental impairment” cognizable under the ADA. … But an employee cannot unilaterally establish that she falls within the “regarded as” prong on her own. See, e.g., Talley v. Fam.

Shrout v. Black Clawson Co.

689 F. Supp. 774 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Apr 13, 1988

Smith’s testimony, to the extent that is contrary to the evidence of the abovementioned witnesses, is clearly outweighed by their testimony. … The harassment which occurred was clearly based upon sex.

Bey v. Smith

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

An action has no arguable legal basis when the defendant is immune from suit or when plaintiff claims a violation of a legal interest which clearly does not exist. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327. … Plaintiff asserts that even though Smith has told plaintiff that he qualified for the kosher meal program at MCI and had been added to the list of those approved to receive kosher meals, “Chaplain Smith . . . always found

In re Ohio Execution Protocol Litigation

868 F. Supp. 2d 625 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Apr 4, 2012

Similarly, all of the resulting documentation included notations clearly reflecting that they were a part of “training.” (Defs.’ Ex. 16, at 302-04.) … The end result is that any function the protocol specifically assigns to a medically-qualified person can be performed only by a medically-qualified person, regardless of the nature of the function.

Brookpark Entertainment, Inc. v. Brown

750 F. Supp. 856 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Nov 6, 1990

Clearly, the election is being held beyond the one year limitation. … The Court is of the opinion that the code sections clearly fail to single out the plaintiff in an effort to punish the plaintiff.

Bronson v. Borchert

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Jan 20, 2023

As the Magistrate Judge noted, “it is well established that judges and other court officers enjoy absolute immunity from suit on claims arising out of the performance of judicial or quasi-judicial functions.” … The Magistrate Judge, then, did not err, let alone clearly err, in concluding that Borchert has quasi-judicial immunity. For this reason, the Court ADOPTS the R&R (Doc. 5) in full.

Cason v. International Truck and Engine Corp.

492 F. Supp. 2d 802 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 28, 2005

The district court clearly failed to do this, improperly conflating the distinct stages of the McDonnell Douglas inquiry. Id. at 660-61. … established by that statute); Curry v.

Sims v. Internal Revenue Service

District Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 27, 2022

jurisdiction and the IRS’s waiver of sovereign immunity under 26 U.S.C. § 7422(a).1 (Id. … Sims qualifies for the financial disability exception, however, Plaintiffs never alleged, nor does the record reflect, that they submitted the required documentation to the IRS. See Abston v.

Souders v. Besl

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

An action has no arguable legal basis when the defendant is immune from suit or when plaintiff claims a violation of a legal interest which clearly does not exist. … All three judicial officers clearly acted within their judicial authority in ruling on the CSPO. Therefore, all Defendants are absolutely immune from civil liability and all claims against them should be dismissed.

Mills v. Anderson

961 F. Supp. 198 · District Court, S.D. Ohio · Feb 12, 1997

Therefore, regardless of the applicability of the amendments to the Revised Code, Ohio does not qualify as an opt-in state. 2. … The language of the statute clearly requires that different counsel be appointed unless the prisoner and counsel both request otherwise.