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!

January 9th, 2007

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

TOPICS:
- Tax Injunction Act
- Sentencing Guidelines
- Armed Career Criminal Act
- Bankruptcy Court - fees
 

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

 

Colonial Pipeline Co v. Morgan  (Jan. 9th, 2007) (Appeal from M.D. Tenn.)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0006p-06.pdf
-  Colonial Pipeline Company ("Colonial") appeals the district court's dismissal of its complaint under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Colonial challenges the constitutionality of Tennessee's statutory scheme for classifying real and personal property for purposes of ad valorem tax assessment under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution; Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 (the Commerce Clause) of the United States Constitution; Article VI, Clause 2 (the Supremacy Clause) of the United States Constitution; and Article I, Section 8 and Article XI, Section 8 of the Tennessee State Constitution. The district court found that the Tax Injunction Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1341, and comity principles bar Colonial from suing in federal court. For the following reasons, we AFFIRM the district court's decision.
 
USA v. Whited (Jan. 9th, 2007) (Appeal from E.D. Tenn.)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0007p-06.pdf
-  A federal grand jury indicted George Bryant, Crystal Keel, Scottie Magouirk, and Richard Whited on ten counts relating to the manufacture and use of methamphetamine. Following a jury trial in Bryant's case and guilty pleas in the cases of Keel, Magouirk, and Whited, the district court imposed sentences of 100, 188, 151, and 151 months in prison, respectively. Whited's sole challenge relates to whether his arrest in a motel room containing both a minor and an operational methamphetamine laboratory, replete with the smell of methamphetamine chemicals, warranted a six-level enhancement for substantial risk of harm to the life of a minor under the United States Sentencing Guidelines (U.S.S.G.) § 2D1.1(b)(6)(C) (2005) (now at § 2D1.1(b)(8)(C) in the 2006 version). For the reasons set forth below, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.
 
USA v. Wells (Jan. 9th, 2007) (Appeal from E.D. Mich.)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0008p-06.pdf
-  The appeal in this case presents a question of first impression in this circuit: whether for purposes of recidivist sentencing under the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), a prior adjudication of juvenile delinquency is subject to characterization under the "categorical approach" mandated for the review of prior adult convictions by Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (1990), and Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 13 (2005). We hold that it is.
 
USA v. Mooneyham (Jan. 9th, 2007) (Appeal from E.D. Tenn.)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0009p-06.pdf
-  This appeal is from district court judgments entered against defendant George Mooneyham that arose from charges in two separate indictments and resulted in separate convictions following two separate jury trials. The cases were consolidated in the district court at sentencing, but for purposes of our analysis, they will be treated as separate cases in this opinion. In each case, we find no reversible error in connection with Mooneyham's convictions, but both cases must be remanded for resentencing under United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), which was decided by the United States Supreme Court while these cases were on appeal.
 
In re: Dale Williams v. (Jan. 9th, 2007) (Appeal from U.S. Bankruptcy Court)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07b0001p-06.pdf
-  William P. Bringman ("Appellant"), counsel for the chapter 7 debtors, appeals the bankruptcy court's order denying his motion for reconsideration of his fee application, and reducing his requested attorney's fees to the presumptive, or "no look," fee for chapter 7 cases filed in the Northern District of Ohio prior to October 17, 2005. For the reasons that follow, the bankruptcy court's order is REVERSED and REMANDED.
 

Daily Case Updates