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!

March 14, 2005

Today's topics:  Bivens action, carrier liability, Federal Tort Claims Act, immigration: temporary visits, insurance, "logo liability", negligence, search warrant: particularity and place

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

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

No opinions.
 

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

Baranski v. Fifteen Unknown Agents (March 14, 2005) (Appeal from W.D Ky.)
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0130p-06.pdf
Baranski was convicted of conspiracy to import machine guns, after being indicted in Missouri, and lost on appeal in the 8th Circuit. He and his Kentucky company then sued the unnamed Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearm (ATF) agents, seeking unsealing of an affidavit used in the search that resulted in his conviction, as well as other damages. The district court granted the United States' motion to substitute itself for individual defendants (Federal Tort Claims Act), and dismissed the plaintiffs' state tort claims. The district court then dismissed plaintiffs' Constitutional claims, including a Bivens action, finding that the defendants had qualified immunity. The plaintiffs appealed dismissal of their 4th Amendment claims. Reversed the Bivens claims as they relate to qualified immunity, but affirmed to the extent they sought damages or return of firearms, and reversed the dismissal both of the compensatory and punitive damages claims.

Hana v. Gonzales (March 14, 2005) (Appeal from Board of Immigration Appeals (MI))
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0131p-06.pdf
Hana was granted permanent residency in the US, but while her husband and childrens' petitions for immigration were being processed, she returned to work in Iraq. Although she had a re-entry visa, she was stopped and interviewed, and INS charged her with excludability. She sought a hearing and the immigration judge terminated the exclusion proceedings. INS appealed the ruling, the Board reversed the immigration judge, because the trips back to Iraq weren't "temporary". Granted petition for review, vacated the Board's decision, and remand for termination of removal proceedings.

Ross v. Wall Street Sys. (March 14, 2005) (Appeal from W.D. Ky.)
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0129p-06.pdf
Ross was injured when an 18 wheeler rear-ended his car. The truck appeared to be leased by Wall Street and Ross sued them, and the insurance carrier. Wall Street terminated the lease prior to the accident because the driver failed to show "bobtail" or supplemental insurance coverage. Ross claimed that Wall Street was still liable, because the truck had Wall Street placards on ("logo liability"). The district court granted summary judgment to the defendants, because the regulation on placards had changed. Affirmed.

Daily Case Updates