|
|
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, 2006
Ohio Supreme Court
| Ohio First District |
U.S. 6th Circuit - Ohio | U.S. 6th Circuit - Other States
TOPICS:
- Immigration - request for asylum - false documents - forgeries
- Constitution - First Amendment retaliation - whistleblower statute
- 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
-
-
Alexandrov v. Gonzales (April 4, 2006) (Appeal from State of Michigan
Agency)
-
http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0117p-06.pdf
- Todor D. Alexandrov was born on August 21, 1971, and is a native
and citizen of Bulgaria. Alexandrov entered the United States in 1996 on
a student visa to attend McNeese State University in Louisiana. He never
attended the university, but on May 6, 1997, filed an administrative
request for asylum. On September 26, 1997, Alexandrov received notice
that his asylum application had been approved. Nearly six months later,
however, the INS issued a notice of intent to terminate his asylum
status based on its conclusion that Alexandrov had submitted fraudulent
documents in support of his application. After a hearing, the
immigration court agreed that the documents were fraudulent and that
Alexandrov had submitted a frivolous asylum application within the
meaning of 8 U.S.C. § 1158(d)(6) and 8 C.F.R. § 1208.20.1 Based on this
finding, the court also made an adverse credibility finding against
Alexandrov and denied all forms of relief.2 The Board of Immigration
Appeals affirmed in a conclusory order adopting the findings of the
immigration court. For the following reasons, we GRANT the petition for
review and REMAND for further consideration * particularly of
Alexandrov's adjustment of status to a lawful permanent resident based
on his derivative eligibility * before a different immigration judge.
Nair v. Oakland Cnty, et al (April 4, 2006) (Appeal from E.D.
Michigan)
-
http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0118p-06.pdf
- Dr. Sreedharan Nair challenges the district court's entry of
summary judgment against him in this lawsuit claiming (1) First
Amendment retaliation under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and (2) a violation of
Michigan's whistleblower statute. Because Nair's speech did not touch on
a matter of public concern, we reject his First Amendment claim, and
because his speech did not threaten to report a violation of law, we
reject his state-law claim. And because the defendants have raised a
sovereign-immunity defense to these claims as an alternative ground for
affirmance, we need not decide whether their sovereign-immunity defense
otherwise restricts our authority to reach the merits of this case. We
affirm.
|
Daily Case Updates
|