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 or 2006.

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

February 10, 2005

Today's topics:   § 1983, common carrier, condemnation and eminent domain, criminal sentences, gender discrimination, employment, municipality, retaliation, Title VII, unconstitutional conditions

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

Ohio Supreme Court

No opinions.
 

First District Court of Appeals

No opinions.

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

No opinions.

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

City of Riverview v. Surface Transportation Board
City of Trenton v. Surface Transportation Board
County of Wayne v. Surface Transportation Board (February 10, 2005) (Appeal from STB)
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0066p-06.pdf
Riverview Trenton Railroad Company intervened and sought an exemption from the STB, a successor to the Interstate Commerce Commission, to build a transportation facility in Trenton and Riverview.  The cities contested the exemption with the STB, asserting that the Company's proposal was a sham, but the Board found that there was no significant environmental impact and that the Company proposed to build a bona fide facility.  Affirmed.

R.S.W.W. d/b/a/ Goose Island Brewery v. City of Keego Harbor (February 10, 2005) (Appeal from E.D. Mich.)
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0065p-06.pdf
The brewery, located in Keego Harboar, filed a §1983 suit against the City for allegedly trying to force it to close earlier than its liquor licenses allowed. The complaint alleged violation of the "unconstitutional conditions" doctrine..  The district court granted summary judgment to some defendants and a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.  Reversed dismissal of unconstitutional claims and challenge to sign ordinance, otherwise affirmed and remanded for further proceedings.

Williams v. Eau Claire Pub. Sch. (February 10, 2005) (Appeal from W.D. Mich.)
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0067p-06.pdf
Williams sued the school district under 42 USC §1983, Title VII, and state civil rights laws for gender discrimination and retaliation.  The jury found for the school district and Williams appealed because the court refused to give the jury Williams' instructions on pretext.  Affirmed.

United States v. Milan (February 10, 2005) (Appeal from W.D. Tenn.)
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0068p-06.pdf
The Milans pled guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute drugs.  Both were sentenced, but one defendant received an enhanced sentence that was then reduced.  Affirmed judgment of district court for defendant not given the maximum, but vacated the sentence for the second who was given an enhanced sentence, and remanded for resentencing in line with U.S. v. Booker.

Other Ohio State District Court of Appeals

No opinions.

Daily Case Updates