Cases

656 F.Supp.2d 751 (2009) Steven L. GARDNER, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF CLEVELAND, et al., Defendants. Case No. 1:07 CV 1601. United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division. August 20, 2009. *754 Laurence A. Turbow, Laurence A. Turbow, Cleveland, OH, for Plaintiff. Gary S. Singletary, City of Cleveland Department of L

PREGERSON, Circuit Judge: This case involves the application of the Fair Labor Standards Act’s (“FLSA”) overtime exemption for an “employee engaged in fire protection activities.” 29 U.S.C. § 207(k). Unless an exemption applies, the FLSA requires that employees be compensated at a rate of one-and-one-half times their regular hourly rate for all hours worked in excess of forty

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER KATHLEEN M. O’MALLEY, District Judge. Before the court are Plaintiff Linda Card’s (“Card”) motion for class certification and appointment of counsel [dkt. 19] and Defendant City of Cleveland’s (“Cleveland”) motion for summary judgment [dkt. 22]. For the following reasons, the court GRANTS Card’s motion for class certification and DENIES

Lanzinger, J. *34{¶ 1} In this case, we decide whether a municipality may constitutionally use its home-rule powers to authorize a method of traffic enforcement that imposes a civil fine on the registered owner of a vehicle identified by automatic camera to be speeding in a school zone. {¶ 2} We have accepted pursuant to S.CtPrac.R. XVIII(6) an issue

MEMORANDUM OPINION (Granting Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment) Henry E. Hudson, United States District Judge Plaintiff ZUP, LLC (“ZUP” or “Plaintiff’) brings suit against Defendant Nash Manufacturing, Inc. (“Nash” or “Defendant”) after a proposed business deal for a joint manufacturing venture turned sour. Both ZUP and Nash manufacture water recreational devices, with the former

Affirmed by published opinion. Judge LUTTIG wrote the opinion, in which Judge WILKINS and Judge NIEMEYER joined. OPINION LUTTIG, Circuit Judge. Appellants are certified firefighters, but they are cross-trained to provide varying levels of emergency medical services (“EMS”) as part of their job duties at the City of Norfolk’s Department of Fire and Paramedical Services (“NFPS”). They co

RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit Rule 206 File Name: 07a0028p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT _________________ X Plaintiff-Appellant/ -

RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit Rule 206 File Name: 05a0372p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT _________________ X

13 S.W.3d 894 (2000) In re Tommy NASH. No. 09-99-519CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, Beaumont. Submitted December 9, 1999. Decided March 30, 2000. *895 Richard R. Burroughs, Cleveland, for appellant. Robert G. Osborn, Law Offices of Robert G. Osborn, Lufkin, for real party in interest. Before WALKER, C.J., BU

{¶ 25} 1 agree with the majority's treatment of the second assignment of error regarding the negligent-misrepresentation claim. However, 1 respectfully dissent from its treatment of the gender-discrimination claim and would reverse the trial court's grant of summary judgment. Gender Discrimination {¶ 26} Hamilton argues in her first assignment of error that the trial court erred in granting summary

18-2188 City of New York v. Chevron Corp. 1 United States Court of Appeals 2 For the Second Circuit 3 4 5 August Term 2019 6 7 Argued: November 22, 2019 8 Decided: April 1, 2021 9 10 No. 18-2188 11 12 13 CITY OF

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JAMES O. BROWNING, District Judge. THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment Dismissing Complaint in its Entirety, filed March 29, 2013 (Doc. 26)(“MTD & MSJ.”). The Court held a hearing on November 1, 2013. The primary issue is whether the Court will dismiss for failure to state a claim or gr

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 25a0312p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ ASHLY ROMERO, as personal representative for the │ estate of Stephe

OPINION COOK, Circuit Judge. After more than thirteen years of litigation, including a bench trial, numerous preliminary injunctions, and a previous appeal affirming the grant of injunctive relief for some plaintiffs, see Johnson v. City of Memphis (“Johnson Appeal I ”), 444 Fed. Appx. 856, 861 (6th Cir.2011), three consolidated cases

MEMORANDUM AND OPINION LEE H. ROSENTHAL, District Judge. This Title VII disparate-impact suit challenges the City of Houston’s system for promoting firefighters to the positions of captain and senior captain. Historically, the City has promoted firefighters based on their years of service with the Houston Fire Department (“HFD”) and their scores on a multiple-choice exam. The format and general content of th

Mr. Justice Brennan, with whom Mr. Justice Marshall joins, concurring. I join the plurality’s opinion. I agree that the Constitution is not powerless to prevent East Cleveland from prosecuting as a criminal and jailing1 a 63-year-old grandmother for refusing to expel from her home her now 10-year-old grandson who has lived with her and been brought up by her since his m

569 A.2d 447 (1989) Virginia NASH v. WARREN ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. No. 87-034. Supreme Court of Vermont. October 6, 1989. Motion for Reargument Denied November 7, 1989. *448 George E. Rice, Jr., Montpelier, for plaintiff-appellee. Gloria K. Rice of McKee, Giuliani & Cleveland, Montpelier, for defe

O’Connor, J. {¶ 1} In case Nos. 2005-1210 and 2005-1211, we decide the constitutionality of a municipality’s taking of an individual’s property by eminent domain and transferring the property to a private entity for redevelopment. In doing so, we must balance two competing interests of great import in American democracy: the individual’s rights in the possession and security of property and the sovereign’s power to take priv

443 F.Supp.2d 145 (2006) Jacob BRADLEY, Noah Bradley, Keith Ridley, and Jared Thomas, Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF LYNN, et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. 05-10213-PBS. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. August 8, 2006. *146 *147 *148 Nadine M. Co

(2008) Oxana Alexandrovna KOULKINA, et al., Plaintiffs, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Defendants. No. 06 Civ. 11357(SHS)(HBP). United States District Court, S.D. New York. February 19, 2008. ORDER SIDNEY H. STEIN, District Judge. On January 23, 2008, Magistrate Judge Henry Pitman issued a thorough 68 page Report and Recom