Daily Case Update Archive

As a service to our members, we monitor opinions issued from the Ohio Supreme Court, the Ohio State First District Court of Appeals, and the United States Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.  You can read the latest summaries or archived summaries from 2005 , 2006 , 2007 , 2008 , 2009 , 2010 , 2011.

If you would like to receive a daily e-mail with same-day case updates, please join our Subscribers-Only discussion list.  Not a subscriber?  Join today!

Dec. 15th & 16th, 2008

Ohio Supreme Court | Ohio First District | U.S. 6th Circuit - Ohio | U.S. 6th Circuit - Other States
 

TOPICS:
- Ohio Open Meetings Law
- Sentencing / Withdraw of plea / Right of allocution
- Insurance dispute / Coverage
- LMRA / ERISA / Collective bargaining Agreements
- Sentencing / Criminal history
 

Ohio Supreme Court

 

No Opinions.
 

First District Court of Appeals

[Search Other Ohio Districts]
 
No Opinions.
          

U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals:  Ohio Cases

 

Leslie Warthman v. Genoa Township Board of Truste (Dec. 15, 2008)(Appeal from S.D. OH)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/08a0444p-06.pdf
-  Leslie Warthman filed a complaint in the Court of Common Pleas for Delaware County, Ohio, arguing that the Genoa Township Board of Trustees violated the Ohio Open Meetings Law when it terminated her employment without allowing her to respond to the allegations against her at a public hearing. The Township removed the case to the federal district court on the basis that a reference in the complaint to the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution created federal question jurisdiction. Holding that the complaint did not state a federal cause of action, the district court remanded Warthman’s lawsuit to the state court. The district court declined, however, to award Warthman the costs and attorney fees associated with the removal and subsequent remand. For the reasons set forth below, we VACATE the portion of the district court’s judgment that denied Warthman her request for costs and attorney fees and REMAND the case for reconsideration of that issue.
        

U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals: Other States Cases

 

USA v. Haygood (Dec. 15, 2008)(Appeal from E.D. MI)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/08a0445p-06.pdf
-  Rhamel Haygood pled guilty to four counts relating to his possession of marijuana and firearms that the police found in his home during the execution of a search warrant. At his sentencing hearing four and a half months later, he attempted to withdraw his guilty plea. The district court denied that request and sentenced him to 66 months of imprisonment. Haygood now appeals his conviction and his sentence. He argues that the district court erred in refusing to allow him to withdraw his plea of guilty, and that his sentence should be vacated because the district court did not provide him with an opportunity to exercise his right of allocution at his sentencing hearing. For the reasons set forth below, we AFFIRM Haygood’s conviction, but VACATE his sentence and REMAND the case for resentencing.
 
Auto-Owners Insurance Company v. Redland Insurance Company (Dec. 15, 2008)(Appeal from W.D. MI)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/08a0446p-06.pdf
-  The question prompted by this insurance dispute is whether a driver of a tractor-trailer rig operates “in the business” of a motor carrier after he completes one delivery and, in anticipation of receiving another delivery order, begins to drive to find a place to sleep for the night*at which point a fatal car accident occurs.
 
UAW v. ArvinMeritor Inc (Dec. 16, 2008)(Appeal from E.D. MI)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/08a0447p-06.pdf
-  This is an action by retired employees and their union against Rockwell International Corporation and its successor companies. The plaintiffs sued the defendants under § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA) and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) to enforce what they contend was a promise by the defendants in the applicable collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) to provided retirees and their surviving spouses with lifetime healthcare benefits. Finding that the CBAs contained such enforceable promises, the district court granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs. For the reasons set forth below, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.
 
USA v. Steven Shor (Dec. 16, 2008)(Appeal from E.D. MI)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/08a0448p-06.pdf
-  Steven Shor challenges the sentence
imposed by the district court on the grounds that the presentence report improperly calculated his criminal history. Because we find that the district court properly calculated his sentence, we AFFIRM.