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 1, 2007

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

TOPICS:
- Federal employee’s collective bargaining agreement - jurisdiction
- Sentencing
- Class action under 1983
 

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

 

Toledo v. Secretary US Dept  (May 1, 2007) (Appeal from W.D. Kent.)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0150p-06.pdf
-  Teodoro Toledo and Joseph Tucker claim that the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) breached their rights under a collective bargaining agreement. Because Toledo and Tucker failed to establish the district court’s jurisdiction over their suit, we affirm.
 
USA v. McIntosh  (May 1, 2007) (Appeal from W.D. Mich.)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0151p-06.pdf
-  Defendant Joe Louis McIntosh pled guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm and possession with intent to distribute five grams or more of cocaine base. The latter count carried a statutory minimum of sixty months’ imprisonment. The district court sentenced McIntosh to thirty months. The government now appeals, claiming that the plea agreement did not authorize the district court to depart below the statutory minimum. For the reasons below, we hold that the plea agreement authorized this sentence. Therefore, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
 
Lindsey v. Detroit Entertain  (May 1, 2007) (Appeal from E.D. Mich.)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0152p-06.pdf
-  Plaintiffs are seven unrelated individuals who were each detained by employees of Defendant Detroit Entertainment, L.L.C., which owns and operates MotorCity Casino, for picking up allegedly abandoned tokens or credits found in Defendant’s slot machines. Plaintiffs brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming that Defendant violated their constitutional rights under color of state law when Defendant’s security personnel detained Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also sought to represent a class of similarly situated individuals. The district court denied class certification, and granted summary judgment in favor of Defendant, holding that Plaintiffs could not demonstrate that Defendant’s actions constituted “state action” for the purpose of § 1983. For the reasons that follow, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.
    

Daily Case Updates