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 3, 2006

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

TOPICS:
- Torts * Medical malpractice
- Money-laundering statute
- Wrongful termination
- Immigration and Nationality Act
- IRS -voluminous documents
 

Ohio Supreme Court

 

Schirmer v. Mt. Auburn Obstetrics & Gynecologic Assoc., Inc. (March 3, 2006) (2006-Ohio-942)
- http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-ohio-942.pdf
- Torts * Medical malpractice ― Wrongful birth * Negligent genetic counseling or negligent failure to diagnose fetal defect or disease ― Damages for wrongful birth limited to costs related to pregnancy and birth.
 

First District Court of Appeals

[Search Other Ohio Districts]
 

State v. Daqer (March 3, 2006) (2006-Ohio-955)
- http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-ohio-955.pdf
- The defendant's convictions for money laundering under R.C. 1315.55(A)(2) were based upon sufficient evidence and were not against the manifest weight of the evidence:  the defendant's operation of a check-cashing business without a license was an unlawful activity within the meaning of the money-laundering statute; and even though the defendant was not attempting to conceal the origin of the proceeds, his withdrawal of separate sums under $10,000 from his commercial account could have been reasonably construed as an attempt to avoid federal transaction-reporting requirements and therefore as a violation of R.C.1315.55(A)(2).
 

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

 

Silberstein v. City of Dayton  (March 3, 2006) (Appeal for S.D. Ohio)
- http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0083p-06.pdf
- This case arose as a § 1983 claim brought by Plaintiff- Appellee Susan Fisler Silberstein for alleged wrongful termination in violation of her First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. City of Dayton Civil Service Board Members James Lindsey ("Lindsey"), Talbert Grooms ("Grooms"), and Betty Toney ("Toney") (collectively referred to herein as the "Board Members"), moved for summary judgment based on the defense of qualified immunity as to both the First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment claims. The Board Members now appeal the district court's May 28, 2004 order denying summary judgment to all three Board Members as to Silberstein's Fourteenth Amendment claim and denying summary judgment to Lindsey and Grooms as to Silberstein's First Amendment claim. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm the district court's decision as to the Fourteenth Amendment qualified immunity claim, but reverse the district court's decision as to the First Amendment qualified immunity claim.
 

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

 

Sterkaj v. Gonzales  (March 3, 2006) (Board of Immigration Appeals)
- http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0084p-06.pdf
- Fatjon Sterkaj and his wife Amemona Sokoli-Sterkaj1 seek review of a final order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) summarily affirming the Immigration Judge's (IJ) decision to deny their application for asylum and withholding of removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). Mr. Sterkaj challenges the IJ's adverse-credibility and frivolous-application findings and asserts that the BIA denied him due process by relying on an inaccurate transcript to review his case and by affirming the IJ's decision without opinion. Concluding that substantial evidence supports the IJ's findings and discerning no due process violation, we deny the petition for review.

USA v. Monumental Life Ins (March 3, 2006) (Appeal from W.D. Kentucky)
- http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0085p-06.pdf
- Monumental Life Insurance Company appeals from the district court's order enforcing an administrative summons issued by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The summons requested voluminous documents from Monumental, a third party in the IRS's investigation of Johnson Systems, Inc. On appeal, Monumental argues that the district court erred in rejecting the magistrate judge's findings that (1) the IRS already had in its possession many of the documents requested, and (2) the IRS's summons was overbroad in that it sought documents not relevant to the investigation of Johnson. Monumental also contends that, even if we were to affirm the district court's decision, a protective order should be imposed upon any proprietary materials that Monumental is required to provide to the IRS. For the reasons set forth below, we REVERSE the judgment of the district court and deny enforcement of the IRS summons.
 

Daily Case Updates