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!

May 9, 2005

Today's topics:  attorneys fees/expenses, immigration: persecution, qualified immunity: clearly established constitutional right.

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

Sample v. Bailey (May 9, 2005) (Appeal from N.D. Ohio)
http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0209p-06.pdf 
Patricia Ambrose Rubright, Bruce H. Christensen, Jr. (City of Akron), appellant; David C. Sheldon (John Brooks Cameron & Assoc.), Craig T. Weintraub, appellee
In attempting to apprehend Sample during a break-in, Akron City Police Officer Bailey shot him several times. Sample pled guilty to breaking and entering. He sued the City, police chief, and Bailey for violating his 4th amendment rights and other state claims. The district court denied Bailey's motion for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. Bailey appealed. AFFIRMED, because Sample raised genuine issue of fact about violation of clearly established constitutional right and Bailey's actions were objectively unreasonable.
 

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

 

Bartholomew v. Town of Collierville (May 9, 2005) (Appeal from W.D. Tenn.)
http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0210p-06.pdf 
Bartholomew sued the Town to bar enforcement of an ordinance. He submitted an amended complaint after the Town answered, that stated federal claims (42 USC §1983) and the case was removed to district court. The district court granted Bartholomew's motion to remand, because removal was premature. Bartholomew sought attorneys fees and expenses, which the district court denied, because the Town's attempt to remove was not wholly lacking in merit. Bartholomew appealed. AFFIRMED.

Gilaj v. Gonzales (May 9, 2005) (Appeal from Bureau of Immigration Appeals)
http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0208p-06.pdf 
The Gilajs' petition for asylum was denied, and they appealed. The BIA affirmed, that the immigration judge's determination that Gilaj had not showed the degree of "persecution" necessary. REVERSED, because the immigration judge's finding as to persecution is not supported by the evidence, GRANTED petition for review of BIA decision, and REMAND for determination of discretionary asylum.
 

Daily Case Updates