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.

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!

April 7, 2005

Today's topics:  bankruptcy: attorney fees dischargeable; Telecommunications Act of 1996

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

Rittenhouse v. Eisen (April 7, 2005) (Appeal from W.D. Mich.)
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0163p-06.pdf
Bankrupt owed attorney who filed petition for attorneys fees, and Rittenhouse bought the receivable account. The bankruptcy trustee barred Rittenhouse from collecting pre-petition fees, and the bankruptcy court found that unpaid pre-petition fees were discharged. The district court affirmed the ruling. Affirmed, holding that pre-petition attorney fees are dischargeable in banktrupcy.

Tennessee ex rel. Wireless Income Prop. v. City of Chattanooga (April 7, 2005)(Appeal from E.D. Tenn.)
http://pacer.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0164a-06.pdf
Wireless builds telecommunications towers and filed applications with the City for permits to build poles. The City declared a moratorium on issuing permits while considering zoning ordinance changes. After the ordinances were lifted, the Wireless applications no longer complied with the new ordinances. Wireless sued, seeking injunctive relief and for violations of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (TCA) and § 1983. The district court granted both parties partial summary judgment, finding that the City had violated the TCA and giving it 60 days to grant or deny the applications, but denied Wireless' request to compel the City to apply the former ordinances. Wireless appealed. Reversed, vacating 60 day order, agreeing with the district court that the City's informal decision making violated the TCA but also finding that its actions were an informal denial, lacking the written requirements and substantial written evidence required by the TCA, remanding for district court to grant injunctive relief - but affirming district dismissal of § 1983 claims.

Daily Case Updates