Sixth Circuit Cases

Jan. 26-30, 2009: US Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals Decisions

PUBLISHED OPINIONS

Opinion	Short Title/District
09a0026p.06	USA v. Kenneth Johnson     Western District of Michigan at Grand Rapids
09a0027p.06	Gary Winnett v. Caterpillar, Inc.     Middle District of Tennessee at Nashville
09a0028p.06	Carol Negron v. USA     Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland
09a0029p.06	USA v. Russell Wimbley     Eastern District of Tennessee at Knoxville
09a0030p.06	USA v. Christian Gagnon     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
09a0031p.06	Harris v. Lafler     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
09a0032p.06	USA v. Young     Eastern District of Tennessee at Winchester
09a0032p.06	USA v. Roller     Eastern District of Tennessee of Chattanooga

    NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION OPINIONS
       

 

Opinion	Short Title/District
09a0055n.06	Edwin Ejikeme v. Don Violet     Southern District of Ohio at Columbus
09a0056n.06	USA v. Ivey     Western District of Tennessee at Jackson
09a0057n.06	Creusere v. Weaver     Eastern District of Kentucky at Covington
09a0058n.06	Abou Sambia v. Michael Mukasey     Board of Immigration Appeals
09a0059n.06	USA v. Jackson     Western District of Kentucky at Bowling Green
09a0059n.06	USA v. Hines     Western District of Kentucky at Bowling Green
09a0060n.06	USA v. Barry Humphries     Eastern District of Michigan at Ann Arbor
09a0061n.06	David Martin v. Cincinnati Gas and Electric Co     Eastern District of Kentucky at Covington
09a0062n.06	USA v. Charles Hughes     Western District of Michigan at Grand Rapids
09a0063n.06	USA v. White     Southern District of Ohio at Columbus
09a0064n.06	USA v. Harris     Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland
09a0065n.06	USA v. Quijada     Southern District of Ohio at Columbus
09a0066n.06	USA v. Henderson     Eastern District of Tennessee of Chattanooga
09a0067n.06	USA v. Robert Malone     Eastern District of Michigan at Flint
09a0068n.06	USA v. Jones     Southern District of Ohio at Cincinnati
09a0069n.06	USA v. Smith     Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland
09a0070n.06	John Cleary v. Michael B. Mukasey     Southern District of Ohio at Columbus
09a0071n.06	USA v. Smith     Eastern District of Tennessee at Knoxville
09a0072n.06	USA v. Wilkins     Eastern District of Tennessee of Chattanooga
09a0073n.06	USA v. Charles Humes     Western District of Tennessee at Memphis
09a0074n.06	James Marr, Jr. v. Commonwealth Land Title Insura     Western District of Kentucky at Louisville
09a0075n.06	Angela Dudley v. Ohio Department of Public Safe     Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland

ECF Update - Notice Amendments to Local Rules Effective 1/12/2009

Here is an update on Sixth Cir. Local Rules Amendments. 

Since I am not a major Sixth Circuit practitioner, any help from the readers regarding announcements and rule changes relative to the Sixth Circuit would be very much appreciated!

I go into their site weekly (or thereabouts) and tabulate and post the week's decisions by name, lower court, AND link to the decision.  I only catch developments serendipitously.

NOTICE OF AMENDMENT
Sixth Circuit Rules 10, 27, 28, 30, and 101
Sixth Circuit Internal Operating Procedures 10 and 11
Sixth Circuit Guide to Electronic Filing

EFFECTIVE JANUARY 12, 2009

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has adopted amendments to several of its local Rules, Internal Operating Procedures, and the Guide to Electronic Filing. These amendments are all effective as of January 12, 2009. The text of the Rules, the Procedures, and the Guide, reflecting these amendments, are available at the links provided above.

The amendments to the Rules were adopted without prior public notice or opportunity to comment upon the Court’s determination that an immediate need existed therefor; 6 Cir. R. 47(a). Pursuant to that Rule the court will welcome comment from any interested persons not later than April 13, 2009. Comments may be addressed to ca06-rules_comments@ca6.uscourts.gov.

Links to full text decisions in our Jan 5-9, Jan. 12-16, and Jan. 19-23, 2009 posts have been fixed. Sorry.

There is nothing like starting the new year with a mea culpa and an apology.

The links in the previous three posts (Jan 5 - 23, 2009) have been repaired.

Here are the posts:

• Jan. 19-23, 2009: US Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals Decisions
• Jan. 12 - 16, 2009: US Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals Decisions
• Jan. 5 - 9, 2009: US Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals Decisions

Jan. 19-23, 2009: US Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals Decisions [UPDATED: Links repaired on 1/31/2009]

PUBLISHED OPINIONS

Opinion	Short Title/District
09a0020p.06	Geoffrey Fieger v. Michigan Supreme Court     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
09a0021a.06	USA v. Bailey     Eastern District of Kentucky at Covington
09a0022p.06	Dennis Pennington v. State Farm Mutual Automobile I     Eastern District of Kentucky at Lexington RONALD LEE GILMAN, Circuit Judge. Stacey Pennington, the 17-year-old daughter of Dennis and Sharon Pennington, was killed in an automobile accident in July 2004. The Penningtons had four drivers in their family, all of whom were insured by State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company. In addition to insuring their vehicles, the Penningtons purchased underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage with limits of $100,000 per person/$300,000 per accident (100/300 UIM coverage). UIM coverage provides funds to an insured if the liability insurance held by the person responsible for the accident is insufficient to compensate the insured for injuries incurred. At issue on appeal is whether, under Kentucky law, an insurance company may charge a greater UIM premium based on the number of drivers on a policy without being liable for multiple UIM coverage units (i.e., “stacking”). The district court determined that the Penningtons purchased only one unit of 100/300 UIM coverage for four drivers and were not entitled to stacking. This appeal followed. A few weeks prior to oral argument, the Penningtons filed a motion asking us to certify the legal question at issue to the Kentucky Supreme Court. For the reasons set forth below, we DENY the motion to certify and AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.
09a0023p.06	Garner v. Cuyahoga Cnty Court     Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland
09a0024p.06	Carter v. Welles-Bowen Realty     Northern District of Ohio at Toledo
09a0025p.06	Barr v. Lafon     Eastern District of Tennessee at Knoxville

    NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION OPINIONS
       

Opinion	Short Title/District
09a0040n.06	USA v. Cornelius Easley     Western District of Tennessee at Memphis
09a0041n.06	Cadle Co v. Reiner, Reiner & Bendett     Northern District of Ohio at Youngstown
09a0042n.06	Pepaj v. Mukasey     Board of Immigration Appeals
09a0043n.06	USA v. Robson     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
09a0044n.06	USA v. Ashiq     Eastern District of Kentucky at London
09a0045n.06	Artan Prifti v. Michael Mukasey     Board of Immigration Appeals
09a0046n.06	Cynthia Turnage v. Norfolk Southern Corporation     Eastern District of Tennessee at Knoxville
09a0047n.06	David Myers v. Huron County, Ohio     Northern District of Ohio at Toledo
09a0048n.06	Linda Wolfanger v. Laurel County, Kentucky     Eastern District of Kentucky at London
09a0049n.06	Jones v. Trombley     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
09a0050n.06	Giklin Arauz v. Ricky Bell     Middle District of Tennessee at Nashville
09a0051n.06	USA v. Neeley     Eastern District of Kentucky at London
09a0052n.06	USA v. Jesse Stark     Western District of Michigan at Marquette
09a0053n.06	Devereaux v. Mills     Eastern District of Tennessee at Knoxville
09a0054n.06	USA v. Ricardo Cornejo     Western District of Michigan at Grand Rapids

Jan. 12 - 16, 2009: US Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals Decisions [UPDATED: Links repaired on 1/31/2009]

PUBLISHED OPINIONS

Opinion	Short Title/District
09a0012p.06	Leonard Pivnick v. White Getgey & Meyer Co. LPA     Southern District of Ohio at Cincinnati
09a0013p.06	USA v. Bates     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
09a0013p.06	USA v. Bates     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
09a0014p.06	USA v. Booth     Eastern District of Tennessee of Chattanooga
09a0015p.06	USA v. Skipper     Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland
09a0016p.06	Kevin Keith v. David Bobby     Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland
09b0001p.06	In re: Omega Door Co v.     U.S. Bankruptcy Court - Youngstown
09b0001p.06	In re: Omega Door Co v.     U.S. Bankruptcy Court - Youngstown
09a0017p.06	Christine Ladd v. Grand Trunk Western Railroad,     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
09a0018p.06	Poteet v. Medtronic Inc     Western District of Tennessee at Memphis
09a0019p.06	Shan Zhao v. Michael B. Mukasey     Board of Immigration Appeals

    NOT RECOMMENDED PUBLICATION OPINIONS
       

Opinion	Short Title/District
09a0020n.06	Inglesias v. Davis     Western District of Michigan at Marquette
09a0021n.06	Edmundo Romberio v. UnumProvident Corporation     Eastern District of Tennessee of Chattanooga
09a0022n.06	USA v. LeBreux     Northern District of Ohio at Akron
09a0022n.06	USA v. Moore     Northern District of Ohio at Akron
09a0022n.06	USA v. Stratman     Northern District of Ohio at Akron
09a0022n.06	USA v. Shrewder     Northern District of Ohio at Akron
09a0023n.06	Hamadna v. Mukasey     Board of Immigration Appeals
09a0024n.06	USA v. Tony Mitchell     Western District of Tennessee at Memphis
09a0025n.06	Larry Melton v. Harold Blankenship     Western District of Tennessee at Jackson
09a0026n.06	Norman Choate v. National Railroad Passenger Co     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
09a0027n.06	USA v. Bill Layne     Eastern District of Tennessee of Chattanooga
09a0028n.06	USA v. Janet Austin     Western District of Tennessee at Memphis
09a0028n.06	USA v. Janet Austin     Western District of Tennessee at Memphis
09a0029n.06	USA v. Brown     Western District of Tennessee at Memphis
09a0030n.06	Freddie Williams, Jr. v. Detroit Board of Education     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
09a0031n.06	USA v. Fields     Western District of Tennessee at Memphis
09a0032n.06	Est of Robt Thomas v. Amer River Transp     Western District of Tennessee at Memphis
09a0032n.06	Est of Robt Thomas v. Amer River Transp     Western District of Tennessee at Memphis
09a0033n.06	Sumardi Sunarto v. Michael Mukasey     Board of Immigration Appeals
09a0034n.06	Maria Fernandez-Marin v. Michael Mukasey     Board of Immigration Appeals
09a0035n.06	Roberta Casden v. Michael Burns     Northern District of Ohio at Toledo
09a0036n.06	USA v. Conner     Eastern District of Kentucky at Lexington
09a0037n.06	USA v. Gregory McMurry     Middle District of Tennessee at Cookeville
09b0001n.06	In re: Elizabeth Ann DIrks v.     U.S. Bankruptcy
09a0038n.06	USA v. William Quinn     Southern District of Ohio at Cincinnati
09a0039n.06	William Flowers v. City of Detroit     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit

 

Jan. 5 - 9, 2009: US Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals Decisions [UPDATED: Links repaired on 1/31/2009]

PUBLISHED OPINIONS

Opinion	Short Title/District
09a0001p.06	In re: Linda S. Cook v.     Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland
09a0002p.06	David Patterson v. Hudson Area Schools     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
09a0003p.06	Fioravante Settembre v. Fidelity & Guaranty Life Insur     Western District of Kentucky at Louisville KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judge. In this matter, the bankruptcy court granted the appellants (collectively, “Fidelity”) summary judgment on their complaint against the debtor, Fioravante Settembre, for denial of a discharge. The district court reversed and remanded the case for trial on Fidelity’s complaint. Fidelity now seeks review of the district court’s order.
09a0004p.06	The Natl Cotton Cncl v. EPA     Environmental Protection Administration
09a0004p.06	BASF Corp v. EPA     Environmental Protection Administration
09a0004p.06	Southern Crop v. EPA     Environmental Protection Administration
09a0004p.06	Waterkeeper Alliance v. EPA     Environmental Protection Administration
09a0004p.06	Agribusiness Assoc v. EPA     Environmental Protection Administration
09a0004p.06	Baykeeper v. EPA     Environmental Protection Administration
09a0004p.06	Environmental Maine v. EPA     Environmental Protection Administration
09a0004p.06	Syngenta Crop v. EPA     Environmental Protection Administration
09a0004p.06	IL Fertilizer v. EPA     Environmental Protection Administration
09a0004p.06	Croplife America v. EPA     Environmental Protection Administration
09a0004p.06	Delta Council v. EPA     Environmental Protection Administration
09a0005p.06	Jay Gunasekera v. Dennis Irwin     Southern District of Ohio at Columbus
09a0006p.06	USA v. Gunter     Eastern District of Tennessee at Greeneville
09a0007p.06	Murphy v. State of Ohio     Northern District of Ohio at Toledo
09a0007p.06	Murphy v. State of Ohio     Northern District of Ohio at Toledo
09a0008p.06	USA v. Paull     Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland
09a0009p.06	Duncan v. USA     Western District of Tennessee at Jackson
09a0010p.06	Fannie Shaw v. Aurgroup Fin'l Credit Union     Southern District of Ohio at Cincinnati
09a0011p.06	USA v. Jean Panak     Northern District of Ohio at Youngstown

    NOT RECOMMENDED  PUBLICATION OPINIONS
       

Opinion	Short Title/District
09a0001n.06	Pickering v. Mukasey     Board of Immigration Appeals
09a0002n.06	Irwin Seating Company v. International Business Machine     Western District of Michigan at Grand Rapids
09a0003n.06	Joshua Davis v. Kurt Jones     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
09a0004n.06	Durham v. US Parole Comm     Eastern District of Kentucky at London
09a0005n.06	Johnson Coal Company v. Bertha Smith     Benefits Review Board
09a0006n.06	Old Republic Insurance Company v. Underwriters Safety and Claims     Western District of Kentucky at Louisville
09a0007n.06	Uszak v. Yellow Transp     Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland
09a0008n.06	Lydia Mason v. Michael Mukasey     Board of Immigration Appeals
09a0009n.06	USA v. Jerry Craig     Eastern District of Tennessee at Greeneville
09a0009n.06	USA v. Bradley Craig     Eastern District of Tennessee at Greeneville
09a0010n.06	Maklaj v. Mukasey     Board of Immigration Appeals
09a0011n.06	Lizzie Howard v. Nationwide Property and Casual     Western District of Tennessee at Memphis
09a0012n.06	USA v. Wilson     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
09a0013n.06	Ndue Prendi v. Michael Mukasey     Board of Immigration Appeals
09a0014n.06	Mamoudou Diakite v. Michael Mukasey     Board of Immigration Appeals
09a0015n.06	USA v. Bishop     Eastern District of Tennessee at Knoxville
09a0016n.06	USA v. Perez     Southern District of Ohio at Dayton
09a0017n.06	USA v. Kellogg     Eastern District of Tennessee of Chattanooga
09a0018n.06	USA v. Christopher Hodge     Western District of Kentucky at Louisville
09a0019n.06	Transition Healthcare Associat v. Tri-State Health Investor     Northern District of Ohio at Toledo

Dec. 29, 2008 - Jan. 2, 2009: US Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals Decisions

    PUBLISHED OPINIONS

Opinion	Short Title/District
08a0460p.06	Krispen Carroll v. Jason Sanders     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
08a0460p.06	Krispen Carroll v. Jason Sanders     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
08a0461p.06	Beth Freeman v. Blue Ridge Paper Products, Inc     Eastern District of Tennessee at Greeneville
08a0462p.06	John Doe v. SexSearch.com     Northern District of Ohio at Toledo
08a0463p.06	Brown v. Smith     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
08a0464p.06	U.S. Motors v. General Motors Europe     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
08a0465p.06	USA v. Davis     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit

    NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION OPINIONS
      

Opinion	Short Title/District
08a0787n.06	Tipton v. Carlton     Eastern District of Tennessee at Knoxville
08a0788n.06	Dorr v. Ecorse     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
08b0017n.06	In re: Clayton B. Smith v.     U.S. Bankruptcy Court - Canton
08a0789n.06	USA v. Wells     Middle District of Tennessee at Nashville

Dec. 22-26, 2008: US 6th Circuit Court of Appeals Decisions

PUBLISHED OPINIONS

Opinion	Short Title/District
08a0453p.06	Total Benefits Planning Agency v. Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield     Southern District of Ohio at Cincinnati
08a0454p.06	USA v. Gross     Eastern District of Tennessee of Chattanooga
08a0454p.06	USA v. Wilkins     Eastern District of Tennessee of Chattanooga
08b0022p.06	In re: Randall J. Hake v.     U.S. Bankruptcy Court - Youngstown
08a0455p.06	Warehouse Production and Maint v. Zenith Logistics, Inc.     Southern District of Ohio at Cincinnati
08a0456p.06	Iroquois on the Beach, Inc. v. General Star Indemnity Company     Western District of Michigan at Marquette MYRON H. BRIGHT, Circuit Judge. Appellant Iroquois on the Beach, Inc. (“Iroquois”), a seasonal hotel insured under an “all risk” policy, appeals from the district court’s1 grant of summary judgment dismissing its claims against General Star Indemnity Company (“General Star”) for water and wind damage losses sustained to its building. The district court determined that exclusion B.2.f. of the insurance policy applied to preclude insurance coverage. The record without dispute established that continuous or repeated seepage or leakage of water over a period of at least fourteen days caused the damages to the insured hotel and that this cause came within the above exclusion. We affirm.
08a0456p.06	Iroquois on the Beach, Inc. v. General Star Indemnity Company     Western District of Michigan at Marquette
08a0457p.06	USA v. White     Eastern District of Kentucky at Covington
08a0458p.06	Huber Winery v. Wilcher     Western District of Kentucky at Louisville CLAY, Circuit Judge. Intervenor Wine and Spirits Wholesalers of Kentucky, Inc., appeals the district court’s grant of partial summary judgment to Plaintiffs Cherry Hill Vineyards, LLC, William G. Schneider, Jr., and John D. Reilly, Jr. Plaintiffs filed suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, successfully challenging the constitutionality of certain provisions of Kentucky’s laws regulating small farm wineries. The district court ruled, pursuant to the Supreme Court’s decision in Granholm v. Heald, 544 U.S. 460 (2005), that the in-person purchase requirement in portions of Kentucky’s statutory scheme discriminated against interstate commerce by limiting the ability of out-of-state small farm wineries to sell and ship wine to Kentucky consumers. For the reasons that follow, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.
08a0459p.06	Peter Grain v. Trinity Health     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit

    NOT RECOMMENDED FOR 
FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION OPINIONS
       

Opinion	Short Title/District
08a0775n.06	Austin v. SecureCare Inc     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
08a0776n.06	USA v. Smith     Western District of Michigan at Grand Rapids
08a0777n.06	Taylor Chevrolet Inc v. Medical Mutual Services LLC     Southern District of Ohio at Columbus
08a0778n.06	Kenneth Clack v. Rock-Tenn Company, Mill Divisi     Eastern District of Tennessee of Chattanooga
08a0779n.06	Ndoci v. Mukasey     Board of Immigration Appeals
08a0780n.06	Connolly v. Howes     Western District of Michigan at Kalamazoo
08a0781n.06	Hurst v. Jackson     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
08a0782n.06	USA v. Jackson     Southern District of Ohio at Columbus
08a0783n.06	Panzie Smith v. Allstate Indemnity Company     Southern District of Ohio at Cincinnati COOK, Circuit Judge. Panzie Smith sued Allstate Indemnity Company (“Allstate”) for reimbursement of losses resulting from a house fire. Summary judgment proceedings and a jury verdict favored Allstate. Smith now appeals. I. A fire that began in the early morning, subsided, then rekindled several hours later destroyed Panzie Smith’s home on May 7, 2004. Smith immediately alerted her insurer, Allstate, precipitating an investigation that same day. An Allstate agent interviewed witnesses (including Smith, her husband, and neighbors), studied the fire’s origin, and assessed the damages. This process disclosed discrepancies about the cause and timing of the fire, the time the fire department arrived, and the true contents of the house. From its investigation, Allstate also learned that the Smiths had a strong financial motive to burn their home and ample opportunity. And most importantly, an outside investigator hired by Allstate determined that an intentional act caused the rekindle. Having considered all these factors, Allstate refused to pay Smith’s claim, relying on policy provisions excluding: (1) losses resulting from “[i]ntentional or criminal acts of or at the direction of any insured person,” and (2) “any loss or occurrence in which any insured person has concealed or misrepresented any material fact or circumstance.” * * * Affirmed.
08a0784n.06	Dodson v. Wilkinson     Southern District of Ohio at Columbus

Dec. 15-19, 2008: US 6th Circuit Court of Appeals Decisions

PUBLISHED OPINIONS

Opinion	Short Title/District
08a0444p.06	Leslie Warthman v. Genoa Township Board of Truste     Southern District of Ohio at Columbus RONALD LEE GILMAN, Circuit Judge. Leslie Warthman filed a complaint in the Court of Common Pleas for Delaware County, Ohio, arguing that the Genoa Township Board of Trustees violated the Ohio Open Meetings Law when it terminated her employment without allowing her to respond to the allegations against her at a public hearing. The Township removed the case to the federal district court on the basis that a reference in the complaint to the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution created federal question jurisdiction. Holding that the complaint did not state a federal cause of action, the district court remanded Warthman’s lawsuit to the state court. The district court declined, however, to award Warthman the costs and attorney fees associated with the removal and subsequent remand. For the reasons set forth below, we VACATE the portion of the district court’s judgment that denied Warthman her request for costs and attorney fees and REMAND the case for reconsideration of that issue.
08a0445p.06	USA v. Haygood     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
08a0446p.06	Auto-Owners Insurance Company v. Redland Insurance Company     Western District of Michigan at Grand Rapids SUTTON, Circuit Judge. The question prompted by this insurance dispute is whether a driver of a tractor-trailer rig operates “in the business” of a motor carrier after he completes one delivery and, in anticipation of receiving another delivery order, begins to drive to find a place to sleep for the night—at which point a fatal car accident occurs. There, the truck driver testified that, “after dropping off a trailer [at the last delivery point], he considered the day’s work over.” Id. at 484. Because the last delivery was a “one-way haul,” the driver explained, he “never got paid a dime for going no place after he left [the last elivery point].” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). The only reason he chose to drive his truck back to the carrier’s office after eating his dinner was because he “had no other place to park it.” Id. He was under no obligation to return to the carrier’s office, and the carrier allowed truckers to park their rigs at its office merely as a matter of convenience. Id. at 591. Here, Gale’s actions were directly linked to Everhart’s commercial interests. Gale was paid roughly $150 a day as long as the truck was available to pick up a load. Fresh off making one delivery for Everhart and reasonably expecting to receive a new assignment the next day, Gale was trying to find a place to sleep (so that he would be qualified to pick up the next day’s load) and positioning himself to get to “Gary—East of Chicago” (where he reasonably expected his next pick-up would be). In the context of this insurance policy and on the undisputed facts of this case, the tractor-trailer rig was being “used . . . in the business” of Everhart Trucking at the time of the accident and thus was not covered by the Redland policy.  For these reasons, we affirm.
08a0447p.06	UAW v. ArvinMeritor Inc     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit RONALD LEE GILMAN, Circuit Judge. This is an action by retired employees and their union against Rockwell International Corporation and its successor companies. The plaintiffs sued the defendants under § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA) and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) to enforce what they contend was a promise by the defendants in the applicable collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) to provided retirees and their surviving spouses with lifetime healthcare benefits. Finding that the CBAs contained such enforceable promises, the district court granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs. For the reasons set forth below, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.
08a0448p.06	USA v. Steven Shor     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
08a0449p.06	Adrian & Blissfield R.R. Co. v. Village of Blissfield     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
08a0450p.06	West v. Bell     Eastern District of Tennessee at Knoxville
08a0450p.06	West v. Bell     Eastern District of Tennessee at Knoxville
08a0451p.06	Shropshire v. Laidlaw Transit Inc     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit ALAN E. NORRIS, Circuit Judge. In this personal injury action, Livonia Shropshire brought suit against defendant Laidlaw Transit, Inc., on behalf of her daughter, Hannah,1 for injuries sustained in an automobile accident that occurred when she was five years old. Because our jurisdiction is premised on diversity of citizenship, 28 U.S.C. § 1332, we apply state substantive law. Michigan’s no-fault automotive insurance scheme governs this case, and requires a plaintiff to show the existence of a “serious impairment of body [sic] function” to recover noneconomic damages. The statute further provides that, for a plaintiff such as Hannah, who alleges she suffered a closed-head injury, whether she is seriously impaired is a question for the jury if a physician testifies under oath that the plaintiff “may have a serious neurological injury.” In the district court, plaintiffs sought to introduce an affidavit satisfying this provision, but the court ruled it inadmissible. Without it, plaintiffs had no evidence that Hannah had suffered a serious impairment of body function, and the district court consequently granted summary judgment to defendant. Plaintiff appealed, and we now affirm the decision of the district court, though upon different reasoning.
08a0451p.06	Shropshire v. Laidlaw Transit Inc     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
08a0452p.06	USA v. Davis     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit

    NOT RECOMMENDED FOR 
FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION OPINIONS
       

Opinion	Short Title/District
08a0759n.06	Anthony Legion v. Kenneth McKee     Eastern District of Michigan at Flint
08a0760n.06	Martin v. United States DOL, et al.     Department of Labor (except OSHA)
08a0761n.06	Purnell v. Arrow Financial Serv     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit PER CURIAM. Plaintiff Leslie Purnell brought this action against defendant Arrow Financial Services, LLC, alleging that Arrow’s efforts to collect on a long-closed Montgomery Wards account in his name violated federal and state statutes governing debt collection practices. Plaintiff’s appeal challenges the district court’s decision, after a bifurcated trial on some claims, to dismiss the remaining federal claims as barred by the oneyear limitations period set forth in the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d). After review of the record and the applicable law, we reverse and No. 07-1903 2 The district court also declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Purnell’s 1 state law claims for violation of the Michigan Occupational Code, Mich. Comp. Laws § 339.901, and the Michigan Debt Collection Practices Act, Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.252. The dismissal of those claims without prejudice is not directly challenged on appeal. 2The letters were sent February 26, 2002, August 26, 2002, October 11, 2002, February 26, 2003, and August 9, 2004. Arrow spoke to plaintiff on August 23, 2002, October 9, 2002, and August 17, 2004. remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
08a0762n.06	USA v. Martedis McPhearson     Western District of Tennessee at Jackson
08a0763n.06	William Paluda v. ThyssenKrupp Budd Company     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
08a0764n.06	USA v. Geiger     Eastern District of Tennessee of Chattanooga
08a0765n.06	USA v. Mendez     Middle District of Tennessee at Nashville
08a0765n.06	USA v. Borrego     Middle District of Tennessee at Nashville
08a0765n.06	USA v. Bencomo-Castillo     Middle District of Tennessee at Nashville
08a0765n.06	USA v. Hernandez     Middle District of Tennessee at Nashville
08a0765n.06	USA v. Perez     Middle District of Tennessee at Nashville
08a0766n.06	USA v. Roach     Eastern District of Tennessee at Greeneville
08a0767n.06	Martin Marietta Materials, Inc v. Bank of Oklahoma     Western District of Kentucky at Paducah
08a0767n.06	Martin Marietta Materials, Inc v. Bank of Oklahoma     Western District of Kentucky at Paducah
08a0768n.06	USA v. Dewitt     Southern District of Ohio at Dayton
08a0769n.06	Linden Bowman v. USA     Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland
08a0770n.06	Xiao Zhuang v. Michael B. Mukasey     Board of Immigration Appeals
08a0771n.06	Pe Win v. Michael Mukasey     Board of Immigration Appeals

UPDATED: Links for posts for decisions from Dec 1-5 and Dec. 8-12, 2008 are now working... Thanks John.

Good help is hard to get; and I continue to be the chief cook and bottlewasher here.

However, thanks to the proofreading efforts of one soul who will remain anonymous, it appears that my links from the last two weeks were "corrupted". 

I have no corrected them:

• Dec. 1-5, 2008: US 6th Circuit Court of Appeals Decisions

• Dec. 8-12, 2008: US 6th Circuit Court of Appeals Decisions