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!

April 4-6, 2005

Today's topics:  §1983: qualified immunity, attorney misconduct, bankruptcy: student loans, bankruptcy: voluntary dismissal, breach of contract: modification, employment termination: just cause, evidence: offered for proper purpose (Rule 404), guilty plea: charges understood, Medicare fraud, qui tam, sentencing (3), social security: disability definition, unemployment compensation, waiver of appellate review (2)

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

Ohio Supreme Court

Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Lehotsky (April 6, 2005)(2005-Ohio-1204)
http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2005/2005-ohio-1204.pdf 
Denise Platfoot Lacey, relator
Attorneys at law - Misconduct - One-year suspension - Neglect of entrusted legal matters - Failure to carry out contract of employment - Failure to pay funds to client - Dishonesty - Failure to cooperate in disciplinary investigation.

State ex rel. Adams v. Krichbaum (April 6, 2005)(2005-Ohio-1203)
http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2005/2005-ohio-1203.pdf
pro se; Paul J. Gains and Greta L. Johnson (Mahoning County)
Mandamus - Resentencing under State v. Comer not required when petitioner's sentence became final before Comer was decided.
 

First District Court of Appeals

[Search Other Ohio Districts]

Conner v. Atlantic Mutual Ins. (April 6, 2005)
http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-040272.pdf 
The Conners were in an auto accident, when their car was struck by an uninsured motorist. They sought to claim through the wife's employer's insurance, Atlantic. Atlantic moved for summary judgment because Ohio law didn't govern, and Carol wasn't acting within the scope of her employment. The trial court granted summary judgment. Affirmed, because the law of New York or Connecticut governs.

Johnson v. Schulte Metal Finishing (April 6, 2005)
../../firstdistrict/2004/C-040324.pdf
Johnson appealed finding that he was fired for just cause and not eligible for unemployment compensation. Affirmed.
 

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

In re: Cohara (April 5, 2005)(Appeal from N.D. Bank. Ohio)
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05b0002p-06.pdf 
Marvin A. Sicherman (Dettlebach Sicherman & Baumgart), appellant
Sicherman, the Chapter 7 trustee, appealed the bankruptcy court's order allowing Cohara's motion to voluntarily dismiss her Chapter 7 case. Cohara had an annuity that she reported as having zero value but in fact would result in $60,000 in future payments. The district court found that the creditors would not be prejudiced by dismissal. Reversed, finding that Cohara did not support her burden to show that dismissal was necessary, and order dismissing case is vacated.

Fields v. Sallie Mae Servicing Corp. (April 5, 2005)(Appeal from N.D. Bank. Ohio) (In re: Fields)
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05b0003p-06.pdf 
Fields filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy. The bankruptcy court found Fields did not satisfy the Brunner undue hardship test, but partially discharged her secured debt, student loans, for equitable reasons. Affirmed.

Power-Tek Solutions Serv. v. Techlink (April 4, 2005) (Appeal from N.D. Ohio)
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0156p-06.pdf 
Debra J. Horn (Meyers Roman Friedberg & Lewis), appellant; Philip Oliss (Squires Sanders & Dempsey), appellee
Power-Tek and Techlink were involved in the sale of parts from a nuclear power plant, and Power-Tek alleged that Techlink breached their contract to pay half of the proceeds of sales. Techlink denied an even-split agreement, but rather responded that they were paying Power-Tek on commission or, if not paying, then because Power-tek wanted future work. The district court granted judgment as a matter of law to Techlink and Power-tek appealed. Affirmed, because the district court's decision, based on a magistrate's finding that the contract was invalid because of substitution, was correct.

U.S. ex rel. Gilligan v. Medtronic, Inc. (April 6, 2005)(Appeal from S.D. Ohio)
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0162p-06.pdf 
Patrick F. McCartan (Jones Day), appellant; Gerald J. Rapien (Taft Stettinius & Hollister), appellees
Medtronic appealed the denial of its motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought under the False Claims Act, alleging Medicare fraud. Reversed, because previous disclosure triggered public disclosure bar of False Claims Act, and court did not have subject matter jurisdiction, and remanded.
 

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

Beard v. Whitmore Lake School Dist. (April 4, 2005)(Appeal from E.D. Mich.)
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0155p-06.pdf 
The school district, and teachers, were sued after they strip searched 20 students after one student reported her prom money stolen. The defendants moved for summary judgment based on qualified immunity, which was denied, and they appealed. Reversed, although the searches were unconstitutional, because defendants did not violate "clearly established" law

Longworth v. Comm'r, Social Sec. Admin. (April 4, 2005)(Appeal from E.D. Ky.)
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0157p-06.pdf 
Longworth was denied social security disability benefits because she was found not to be disabled within the parameters of the Social Security Act. She appealed the commissioner's ruling, but it was affirmed by the district court, which granted summary judgment. Affirmed.

United States v. Garcia-Meza (April 5, 2005)(Appeal from W.D. Mich.)
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0159p-06.pdf 
Garcia-Meza appealed his first degree murder conviction, arguing that evidence was improperly admitted because it was prejudicial and not used for proper purpose, and that the district did not properly define premeditation. Affirmed.

United States v. Madden (April 5, 2005)(Appeal from E.D. Ky.)
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0158p-06.pdf 
Madden pled guilty under the federal vote-buying statute and appealed his conviction and sentence. Affirmed conviction, because appellate review waived, but remanded for resentencing.

United States v. McGilvery (April 5, 2005)(Appeal from E.D. Mich.)
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0160p-06.pdf 
McGilvery appealed his felony sentence. Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, because McGilvery waived right to appeal as part of plea.

United States v. Webb (April 6, 2005)(Appeal from E.D. Ky.)
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0161p-06.pdf 
Webb appealed his conviction and sentence for possession of a machine gun, arguing that his plea was invalid because the court did not properly inform him of the charge during his change-of-plea hearing, and because his sentencing enhancement was erroneous. Affirmed.

Daily Case Updates