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 8, 2007

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

TOPICS:
- Ineffective assistance of counsel
- Claim for lack of standing
- Employee Retirement Income Security Act
- Habeas corpus petition
 

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

 

Dunham v. USA  (May 8, 2007) (Appeal from W.D. Mich)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0163p-06.pdf
-  Todd Dunham is serving a 299-month prison sentence for conspiracy to distribute marijuana, cocaine and heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846 and being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). In this appeal, he challenges the District Court’s denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 for ineffective assistance of counsel and its subsequent refusal to rule on the merits of his Rule 60(b) motion to vacate the earlier § 2255 denial. For the reasons discussed below, we affirm the decisions of the District Court.
 
Prime Media Inc. v. Cty of Brentwood   (May 8, 2007) (Appeal from M.D. Tenn)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0164p-06.pdf
-  This matter is before the Court on Prime Media, Inc.’s petition for rehearing en banc. Upon consideration of the relevant briefs and the record, we vacate our prior opinion, Prime Media, Inc. v. City of Brentwood, 474 F.3d 332 (6th Cir. 2007), and replace it with this amended opinion. Prime Media filed this lawsuit to challenge a sign ordinance of the City of Brentwood, Tennessee. In a prior appeal, this Court reversed the district court’s entry of summary judgment on behalf of Prime Media, ordering the dismissal of Prime Media’s constitutional challenge as applied. On remand, the district court dismissed Prime Media’s remaining challenges to the sign ordinance on the basis of standing. Prime Media appeals that decision by the district court. For the following reasons, we affirm the district court’s decision.
 
Thurman v. Pfizer Inc  (May 8, 2007) (Appeal from E.D. Mich)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0165p-06.pdf
-  Dr. Dale Thurman filed suit against Pfizer, alleging that Pfizer misrepresented the monthly pension to which he would be entitled after five years of employment with the company. Thurman claims that these misrepresentations induced him to leave his prior job in order to work for Pfizer. Thurman initially sued in Michigan state court for rescission and to recover either expectation damages or reliance damages. After Pfizer removed the case to federal court, the district court dismissed the case, holding that Thurman’s suit was preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq., which does not provide the type of relief Thurman requested. We hold that the district court correctly ruled that Thurman’s state-law claims were preempted to the extent that he requested expectation damages, which would require a calculation of plan benefits. However, we hold that the district court erred in its ruling with respect to Thurman’s request for rescission of his participation in the plan and reliance damages in the form of benefits he relinquished by leaving his prior job. These aspects of his state-law claims were not related to the plan, and were thus not preempted. Therefore, we REVERSE the district court’s dismissal of Thurman’s state-law claims to the extent that they are not related to the plan, and REMAND for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
 
Vasquez v. Jones (May 8, 2007) (Appeal from E.D. Mich)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0166p-06.pdf
-  Emilio Salomon Vasquez appeals the district court’s denial of hishabeas corpus petition. We reverse and remand with instructions to grant the petition.
 

Daily Case Updates