Justia U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries

Articles Posted in August, 2011
by
A 66-year -old arrived at petitioner's center with complex ailments, but oriented, able to feed herself and able to speak. During her 18 days at the center, she was sent to the hospital twice with serious medical complications. Upon investigation, the center was found to have failed to maintain substantial compliance with federal regulations for facilities that participate in Medicare and Medicaid (42 U.S.C. § 1395) in its treatment of the resident and appealed the resulting civil money penalty. An administrative law judge, the Departmental Appeals Board, and the Sixth Circuit affirmed. The ALJ acted properly in requiring submission of written testimony, properly weighed the evidence, and found violation of the federal hydration standard, laboratory services requirement, and mandate of a care plan, resulting in "immediate jeopardy."

by
Plaintiff was hired as a nurse by defendant in October 2006, had to take leave for cancer treatment, then was informed that she had been terminated on December 12, 2006 because she did not have "any accrued PTO time or FMLA." The district court dismissed claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act, finding that plaintiff assented to a valid agreement to arbitrate the claims. The Sixth Circuit reversed. The employee handbook stated: "Dispute Resolution Process Please refer to the Eby Companies Dispute Resolution Procedure (DRP) for details." That policy does refer to arbitration and contains a signature line. Plaintiff claims she did not receive or sign the policy and defendant did not provide a signed acknowledgment. There was no indication that plaintiff was notified of the existence of the arbitration agreement, much less that she manifested an intent to agree to its terms.

by
Plaintiff claimed that defendants placed 33 unsolicited telemarketing calls to his home over a three-month period in 2008, in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. 227, and the Ohio Consumer Sales Practices Act, Ohio Rev. Code Ann. 1345.02. Thirty calls were made after he asked to be put on defendant's do-not-call registry. He also alleged invasion of privacy. The district court dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The Sixth Circuit reversed. Federal courts have federal-question jurisdiction over private TCPA and plaintiff alleged damages exceeding $75,000, as required for diversity jurisdiction over state-law claims.

by
Plaintiff, a witness in a gang-related racketeering case, was detained for 12 days, based on the prosecutor's representation to the trial court that plaintiff was unwilling to testify. She was not given an opportunity to be heard or to post bond. Entering judgment for the defendant in a case under 42 U.S.C. 1983, the district court held that the prosecutor was entitled to absolute immunity for conduct falling within her role as a prosecutor. The Sixth Circuit affirmed. When making statements at a preliminary examination about the availability of a witness, the prosecutor functioned as an advocate for the State of Michigan and performed acts intimately associated with the judicial process; she was absolutely immune from suit for her prosecutorial conduct.

by
A native of Algeria and a native of Lebanon and his family were denied asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed and granted voluntary. The Third Circuit denied their petitions. With respect to the Algerian, the IJ considered the totality of the circumstances and provided the reasons for his findings, noting the brevity of petitioner's statements and lack of detail about his experiences in Algeria, his overall demeanor, and the implausibility of his stories. Any reasonable fear of persecution that the Lebanese citizen may have had upon returning to Lebanon has been negated by changed country conditions.

by
After receiving an anonymous tip, police went to the home of defendant's mother-in-law, where defendant was staying, for a "knock and talk." Defendant, who stays at the house intermittently, objected to a search, during which media storage devices were found. Other occupants of the home consented. Defendant was charged with possessing counterfeit securities and fraudulent identification documents. The district court denied his motion to suppress. He pled guilty and was sentenced to 45 months in prison. The Sixth Circuit reversed. Defendant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the bedroom, which he shared with his wife and which he used to store personal belongings.

by
In 1988 defendant was convicted of aggravated murder, aggravated felony murder, kidnapping, and aggravated burglary, and sentenced to death. A federal district court concluded that the prosecution had failed to disclose exculpatory evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland and granted a conditional writ of habeas corpus, requiring the state either to set aside the convictions and sentences or conduct another trial within 180 days. The Sixth Circuit affirmed. About a week before retrial was to begin, the prosecutor notified defense counsel of additional evidence, including blood and soil samples. Defense counsel sought additional time. The court changed the scheduled trial date, which was within the 180 days, to May 4, 2009, which was not. The district court denied the state's motion for more time, issued an unconditional writ, ordered expungement of defendant's record, but declined to bar reprosecution. On remand, following the death of the state's key witness, the district court barred reprosecution.The Sixth Circuit affirmed. The district court continued to have jurisdiction, despite the fact that defendant was no longer incarcerated, based on the collateral consequence: the threat of reprosecution.

by
Plaintiff filed a voluntary Chapter 13 bankruptcy petition and successfully sought to avoid a lien on her manufactured home held by defendant. The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel and Sixth Circuit affirmed. The mortgage did not originally cover the manufactured home, which was personal property until 2007,when a state court entered an in rem judgment and order of sale converting it to an improvement to real property. After that, the home was covered by the mortgage. The conversion, unlike the mortgage, was involuntary as to the plaintiff, so she had standing under 11 U.S.C. 522(h) to avoid the lien.

by
Plaintiff sued the bank after it refused to honor cashier's checks it thought he had obtained by fraud. One check, for $100,000, had previously bounced, another was a starter check for $80,000 and was dated five months earlier. The bank had communication with plaintiff's former employer, indicating fraud. The district court granted summary judgment to the bank. The Sixth Circuit affirmed. Under the Uniform Commercial Code as enacted in Michigan, the bank's actions were lawful even absent any finding of fraud. The checks were not supported by consideration, plaintiff was not a person entitled to enforce the instruments, and plaintiff was not harmed.

by
Plaintiff's claims against her landlord, on behalf of her children, alleged violations of the disclosure requirements contained in the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992, 42 U.S.C. 4851-4856. The district court dismissed. The Sixth Circuit affirmed. The statute does not provide the children with a cause of action to sue for the violations.