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 24, 2005

Today's topics: 
- Contracts: ambiguity of terms
- Criminal: culpability score, sentencing
- Criminal: motion for acquittal
- Due Process/§1983: protected property interest
- Employment: meaning of 'discharge'
- Evidence: double hearsay
- ERISA: arbitrary and capricious standard
- ERISA: plan administrator conflict of interest
- Insurance: "wear and tear"

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

Midkiff v. Adams Co. Regional Water Dist. (May 24, 2005) (Appeal from S.D. Ohio)
http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0226p-06.pdf 
Kimberly M. Skaggs (Equal Justice Found.), Edward A. Icove (Smith & Condini), appellants; John W. Hust (Schroeder, Maundrell, Barbiere & Powers), appellees
The Midkiff's water was cut off after a dispute with their landlord, the property owner, who then asked the Water District to terminate service. The Midkiffs argued that the Water District denied them due process, because it would only provide service to a property owner, and they filed a class action suit. The district court dismissed the Midkiff's §1983 suit against the Water District. AFFIRMED, agreeing that the Midkiff's had no property right to violate.

United States v. Jackson (May 24, 2005) (Appeal from N.D. Ohio)
http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0227p-06.pdf 
Daniel S. Goodman (USDOJ), appellant; Debra K. Migdal, Federal Public Defender's Office, appellee
Jackson pled guilty and was sentenced to three years, which was a downward departure of 8 levels from the sentencing guidelines. The government appealed. VACATED, and REMANDED for resentencing.

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

 

Gismondi v. United Tech. Corp. (May 24, 2005) (Appeal from E.D. Mich.)
http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0228p-06.pdf 
Plaintiffs sued United Tech for early retirement benefits, which they applied for after their division in United Tech was sold to another company. United Tech had denied benefits, because they had been "discharged" when the division was sold, and on that day, they were ineligible for early retirement. The district court granted summary judgment. AFFIRMED.

Meridian Leasing v. Assoc. Aviation Underwriters, Inc. (May 24, 2005) (Appeal from W.D. Mich.)
http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0229p-06.pdf 
Plaintiff's aircraft was damaged when, on starting, it emitted flames from its exhaust stacks. The defendant denied coverage, due to the policy's "wear and tear" coverage. The district court granted partial summary judgment to the Plaintiff but reserved for trial the issue of whether, in interpreting California law, the term "wear and tear" was ambiguous. The court found in a bench trial for the Plaintiff and awarded damages. The insurer appealed. AFFIRMED.

United States v. Gibson (May 24, 2005) (Appeal from W.D. Ky.)
http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0230p-06.pdf 
The defendants - a mine operator, foremen, and superintendents - were convicted of conspiracy, and, among other things, violating the Mine Safety and Health Act (30 USC § 801-825). The government appealed the district court's grant of the defendants' motion to arrest judgment and for judgment of acquittal on 2 counts. The defendants cross-appealed, arguing that the district court erred in not granting judgment of acquittal on the other counts.

Daily Case Updates