16 results for 'judge:"Graham"'.
J. Graham grants, in part, the cell tower operator's motion for summary judgment, ruling the property owner's placement of a padlock on the gate to bar access to the cell tower is undoubtedly a breach of the parties' lease agreement, while the potential loss of cell service or subscribers is sufficient to prove damages. Therefore, the tower operator is entitled to an injunction to require the property owner to remove the padlock and allow unfettered access to the tower.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Graham, Filed On: April 25, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv764, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Property, Contract, Injunction
J. Graham denies the ballot referendum petitioners' motion for a preliminary injunction, ruling that they cannot establish standing to bring First Amendment claims against the Ohio Attorney General. Their issue regarding delays in the ballot certification process cannot be traced to the actions of the Attorney General, but is actually a claim against the judicial branch of the government and its methods for certification of a ballot issue.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Graham, Filed On: April 25, 2024, Case #: 2:24cv1401, NOS: Constitutionality of State Statutes - Other Suits, Categories: Constitution, Elections, First Amendment
J. Graham grants the mall property owner's motion to dismiss, ruling the investors fail to provide a causal link between statements made by executives about potential returns on investment and a sharp drop in the company's stock price shortly before they declared bankruptcy. Although several of the projections proved to be inaccurate, there is no evidence of fraud on the part of the executives, while the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on malls across the country led to a large amount of the losses sustained before the company filed for bankruptcy.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Graham, Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: 2:21cv2757, NOS: Securities/Commodities/Exchange - Other Suits, Categories: Fraud, Securities, Covid-19
J. Graham finds the circuit court improperly denied the water distribution business' motion for judgment on the pleadings in the bottle water supplier's lawsuit alleging false representations and warranties about assets the supplier purchased from the business, including delivery trucks that were not road-worthy, non-functioning water coolers and a candy business that was no longer operational. The parties' asset purchase agreement has a survival clause with a one-year statute of limitations that blocks the supplier's breach of contract and breach of warranty claims, and the supplier's tortious misrepresentation claims are barred by Wisconsin's economic loss doctrine. The case is remanded for the circuit court to dismiss the supplier's complaint. Reversed.
Court: Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Judge: Graham, Filed On: March 21, 2024, Case #: 2023AP000778, Categories: Warranty, Contract
J. Graham denies the employer's motion for summary judgment, ruling the employee's failure to apply for another position with the company is not fatal to his age discrimination claim. He was told by his manager at the time of his termination there were no open positions and the company was "headed in a different direction." Meanwhile, the employer's claim the employee was not "up to the challenge" of a shift in his position is contradicted by evidence in the record, including that the employee met all increased sales goals prior to his termination; therefore, the employee has established a prima facie case for discrimination.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Graham, Filed On: March 12, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv2369, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Evidence, Employment Discrimination
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Graham finds the circuit court properly dismissed a lawsuit from the cheese company and associated entities challenging the state agency's tax assessments of their properties because they did not properly serve the lawsuit to the agency. The record shows the company and entities failed to strictly adhere to process service requirements under state law, in part because the individual tasked with personally serving the agency handed the documents to a security guard and tax specialist at the agency's office, not "an official" with the agency, the day before the documents were due under statutes without clearly noting she was serving legal papers. Affirmed.
Court: Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Judge: Graham, Filed On: February 29, 2024, Case #: 2023AP000583, Categories: Civil Procedure, Tax
J. Graham denies, in part, the police officer's motion for summary judgment, ruling the drawing of his gun on the federal agent immediately upon his arrival at the scene following a 911 call was objectively unreasonable. Although the officer believed the agent was impersonating a law enforcement agent, the federal agent presented no danger and made no attempt to flee when the officer arrived. Additionally, the video and audio recordings of the federal agent's arrest create a question of fact as to how much resistance, if any, he provided while being handcuffed, and so the arresting officers are not entitled to immunity on the excessive force claim related to their use of a taser.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Graham, Filed On: February 23, 2024, Case #: 2:20cv6256, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Evidence, Immunity
J. Graham finds the circuit court improperly ordered defendant to pay restitution in his burglary case beyond what he is able to pay financially, which lined up with the state's argument citing an amendment to the Wisconsin Constitution expanding crime victims' rights, also known as Marsy's Law. As the state now concedes, a provision in Wisconsin statutes limiting monetary restitution in juvenile delinquency cases to an amount which "the juvenile alone is financially able to pay" is constitutional and jibes with the requirements of Marsy's Law. The circuit court's order requiring defendant to pay $26,788 in restitution is reversed, and the circuit court should recalculate defendant's restitution after the case is remitted. Reversed.
Court: Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Judge: Graham, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 2021AP001437, Categories: Burglary, Juvenile Law, Restitution
J. Graham denies the employer's motion to dismiss, ruling that although it is based in Florida, its decision to form a partnership with the Ohio-based employee and allow him to work from home satisfies Ohio's long-arm statute and establishes jurisdiction for the employee's lawsuit.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Graham, Filed On: November 20, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv4376, NOS: Stockholders’ Suits - Contract, Categories: Employment, Jurisdiction, Contract
J. Graham finds the circuit court properly determined that around $82,000 in funds in two joint accounts held by the daughter and her deceased father are the property of the father's estate, rebutting the statutory presumption that joint account funds go to the surviving party after one party's death. The estate provided clear and convincing evidence that the father intended to create "accounts of convenience" so the daughter could access the accounts' funds with his oversight and for his benefit, not joint accounts for which the daughter would be the sole beneficiary upon his death. The circuit court's decision on the estate funds was largely based on admissible evidence about the father's intentions for the accounts, and any erroneously admitted evidence did not significantly impact the proceeding's outcome. Affirmed.
Court: Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Judge: Graham, Filed On: October 12, 2023, Case #: 2022AP002036, Categories: Wills / Probate, Contract
J. Graham finds the circuit court properly granted summary judgment to the city in a lawsuit from trade associations seeking to enjoin enforcement of a zoning ordinance requiring the use of bird-safe glass for constructing or expanding certain types of buildings to reduce the risk of bird collisions. The city's valid zoning ordinance does not fall under the scope of a statewide administrative code barring local governments from enacting or enforcing minimum building code standards that are stricter than the statewide code in terms of altering, constructing or adding to some public and commercial buildings, so it is not technically a building code standard and is not preempted. Affirmed.
Court: Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Judge: Graham, Filed On: October 5, 2023, Case #: 2022AP001468, Categories: Administrative Law, Zoning
J. Graham grants the employer's motion for summary judgment, ruling the insensitive and offensive jokes told on multiple occasions by the employee, including one that involved several babies and a reference to rape, gave it a legitimate reason to fire him and disproves his claim he was retaliated against for filing an EEOC claim.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Graham, Filed On: September 28, 2023, Case #: 2:20cv1977, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Evidence, Employment Retaliation
J. Graham grants the state industrial commission's motion for summary judgment, ruling statements from the commissioner, including his feelings that an investigation into a male supervisor was unfair and that some of the women in the department had difficult demeanors, are insufficient to prove any discriminatory intent behind the female attorney's removal as chief legal counsel. Meanwhile, the female attorney's move to an undesirable cubicle and being assigned a new telephone number upon her return to a previous position do not constitute discriminatory or retaliatory behavior that prevented her from doing her job.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Graham, Filed On: September 12, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv2987, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Evidence, Government, Employment Discrimination
J. Graham finds that the trial court properly dismissed a quiet title that sought to recover land that Denver condemned in 1988 to build a new airport. The city acquired the land free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, which means it has title in fee simple, a fact that is unchanged by the fact that the city did not pay the full market value for the land. And condemnation under eminent domain did not bar the city from using some of the land for non-airport purposes. Affirmed.
Court: Colorado Court Of Appeals, Judge: Graham, Filed On: June 29, 2023, Case #: 22CA0956, Categories: Civil Procedure, Property
J. Graham finds in favor of the truck driver and labor commission in a lawsuit from a concrete company challenging the commission's findings for the truck driver in proceedings he began after the company refused to accommodate his severe back pain by assigning him to a different kind of truck, then constructively fired him when he would not work until he was accommodated. Based on the facts in the record, including from the commission's proceedings, the company discriminated against the driver over his disability in violation of the Wisconsin Fair Employment Act by immediately and steadfastly shutting down his reasonable accommodation request despite it being on notice that he had a disabling condition preventing him from safely doing his job. The circuit court's ruling affirming the commission's decision in part ordering the driver reinstated and awarding him back pay is upheld, and the matter is remanded for the circuit court to award him attorney fees. Affirmed.
Court: Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Judge: Graham, Filed On: June 8, 2023, Case #: 2021AP002028, Categories: Employment, Attorney Fees, Labor