24 results for 'judge:"Sargus"'.
J. Sargus denies Lowe's motion for summary judgment, ruling that while the store manager's poor performance gave it a legitimate reason to fire him, its decision to terminate him less than 10 days into a performance improvement plan and "shifting justifications" for his termination - including his response to a store fire while he was on vacation and the acceleration of his performance improvement timeline - would allow a reasonable jury to consider its reasons a pretext for age discrimination.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: May 2, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv4162, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Evidence, Employment Discrimination
J. Sargus denies, in part, the mortgage lender's motion to dismiss, ruling its failure to provide any explanation for the $90,000 discrepancy between two loan modification agreements sent to the borrowers gives them a plausible cause of action under federal consumer lending laws after the lender declared them in default even though they made payments under the original modification.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv4070, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Consumer Law, Banking / Lending
J. Sargus grants the employer's motion for summary judgment, ruling the employee's poor performance gave it a legitimate reason to fire him, and because the poor performance began well before the employee alleged any discrimination related to his requests for time off for medical testing, the employee cannot establish a claim for disability discrimination or retaliation.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: March 12, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv3752, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Ada / Rehabilitation Act, Employment Discrimination, Employment Retaliation
J. Sargus grants the mineral rights owner's motion for a preliminary injunction, ruling its offer of $100,000 to the surface rights owner and plan to drill horizontally into neighboring properties gives the surface owner due regard for its intended use of the land as a deer hunting reserve. Therefore, the $100,000 will be paid and the mineral rights owner will be allowed to begin development of the proposed wells.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: February 23, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv4232, NOS: All Other Real Property - Real Property, Categories: Environment, Property, Injunction
J. Sargus denies, in part, the employer's motion for summary judgment, ruling issues of fact regarding the IT analyst's primary job duties, including whether she exercised any independent judgment acting as a liaison between the employer and clients, prevent the court from determining whether she was properly classified as an exempt employee under the Fair Labor Standards Act. However, because the analyst's on-call work duties did not require her to be at the office, allowed her to pursue personal activities and involved infrequent calls that usually took less than 10 minutes to resolve, that time is not compensable as overtime.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: February 12, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv2871, NOS: Fair Labor Standards Act - Labor, Categories: Employment, Labor
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. Sargus grants, in part, the polypropylene surgical mesh manufacturer's motion for summary judgment, ruling the patient's failure to warn product liability claim fails because the surgeon who performed the mesh implant surgery admits he did not read any of the literature provided with the product and would not have relied on any of the information in making his recommendation for surgery. Additionally, this failure by the surgeon prevents the patient from proving his fraud and fraudulent concealment claims against the manufacturer, which will also be dismissed.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: February 1, 2024, Case #: 2:18cv1440, NOS: Personal Injury - Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury/Product Liability - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Fraud, Health Care, Product Liability
J. Sargus denies the pilots' union's motion for a preliminary injunction, ruling that while emails sent by the private jet company's corporate officers to discourage certain union activity were "strong critiques" of the union and its bargaining positions, they did not rise to the level anti-union animus required to invoke this court's jurisdiction, while the company's willingness to continue negotiations on a bargaining agreement require dismissal of the union's claims.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: January 5, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv1404, NOS: Railway Labor Act - Labor, Categories: Jurisdiction, Labor / Unions, Injunction
J. Sargus grants the commercial property buyer's motion for partial summary judgment, ruling that although the appraisal of the property for more than $5.5 million removed various contingencies from the contract, the mold removal provision was a separate addendum that remained in effect. Therefore, the seller's failure to remove all mold from the building constituted a breach of the contract.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: December 8, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv1783, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Real Estate, Contract
J. Sargus grants the employer's motion for judgment on the pleadings, ruling its status as a state actor entitles it to sovereign immunity on the employee's Americans with Disabilities Act and Family and Medical Leave Act claims, which must be dismissed.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: September 28, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv4161, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Ada / Rehabilitation Act, Immunity, Employment Retaliation
J. Sargus denies the decorative metal products company's motion to dismiss, ruling the contract claim related to the technology company's confidential information is plausible. The nondisclosure agreement between the parties did not allow for public disclosure of the metal stamping technology, such as that included in the metal company's patent application, but allowed only for transfer of such information between the two parties.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: September 15, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv3433, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Patent, Trade Secrets, Contract
J. Sargus grants, in part, the massage parlor's motion to dismiss, ruling that because its management employees were aware of at least one occurrence of sexual assault by a male employee, an exemption in its insurance policy does not apply and the insurer is required to provide defense coverage in the underlying lawsuit brought by the victim employees.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: September 6, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv3578, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance, Contract
J. Sargus denies the police officer's motion for summary judgment, ruling that while the arrival of the K-9 unit over 12 minutes into the traffic stop is not immediately indicative of a prolonged stop, the officer's actions create an issue of fact as to whether he unreasonably delayed the stop. The officer called for the K-9 unit almost immediately after he pulled over the driver for a license plate infraction, never started paperwork for a ticket, and had another officer speak with the driver midway through the stop, all of which could be interpreted by a jury as unnecessary delays to allow for the eventual search.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: September 5, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv5039, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Evidence
J. Sargus grants, in part, the victim's motion in limine, ruling evidence of previous drug use is irrelevant in relation to his actions on the night he was beaten by police during an arrest and so it will be excluded. Meanwhile, the city's motion in limine to exclude testimony from the victim's expert witness is denied, as the witness's 20 years of experience as a police officer is sufficient to allow him to testify regarding whether officers had probable cause to arrest the victim, and whether the amount of force used was reasonable or necessary.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: August 29, 2023, Case #: 2:20cv1229, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Evidence, Experts
J. Sargus grants in part the landowners' motion for summary judgment, ruling that the natural gas extracted by the energy company does not become "marketable" under the parties' lease until it is processed and separated; therefore, the energy company cannot deduct the processing costs and has underpaid royalties to the landowners since the inception of the lease agreements. Therefore, the landowners are entitled to judgment on the interpretation of the "market enhancement" provision, but the issue of damages will be tried to a jury.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: August 4, 2023, Case #: 2:20cv2028, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Energy, Class Action, Contract
[Consolidated.] J. Sargus grants the sheriff's motion to dismiss, ruling that regardless of the employee's disabilities, his criminal conduct, including an arrest for illegal drug use, gave the sheriff a legitimate reason to fire him.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: July 27, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv3126, NOS: Amer w/Disabilities-Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Ada / Rehabilitation Act, Employment
J. Sargus denies, in part, the former loan company employees' motion for summary judgment, ruling the loan company's evidence of credit pulls and loan documents the employees took with them to a competitor is sufficient to create an issue of fact and allow the tortious interference claim to go to a jury. Meanwhile, because none of the emails used to support the unfair competition claim include the names of both the loan company and the competitor, there is insufficient evidence to support the claim, and that portion of the employees' motion will be granted.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: July 17, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv5922, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Trade Secrets, Damages, Interference With Contract
J. Sargus Jr. finds in favor of the financial consultant for the healthtech company's claim that the financial consultant violated their contract by not disclosing how the 7% success fee in their allegedly modified contract would be paid. The email exchange between the consultant and the company in September 2019 does not constitute a contract modification as the company's co-founder's email was not an offer, and the financial consultant did not accept the non-existent offer; therefore, the parties did not form a contract.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus Jr., Filed On: July 14, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv722, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Contract
J. Sargus denies, in part, the birth control manufacturers' motion to dismiss, ruling that although the Utah-based company did not manufacture the defective Filshie Clip that migrated inside the patient's body and caused her injuries, its continuing conduct and advertisements in the state of Ohio prolonged the patient's injuries and gives this court jurisdiction over the case. However, because there is no evidence the parent company had any business contacts in the state and is not merely an alter ego of the manufacturer, the claims against it must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: July 10, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv1951, NOS: Personal Injury - Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury/Product Liability - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Health Care, Product Liability, Jurisdiction
[Consolidated.] J. Sargus grants a motion for summary judgment filed by the truck driver who stopped to render assistance to the pedestrian before he was struck by another driver, ruling Ohio's Good Samaritan statute applies to the case. The truck driver aided an individual involved in an emergency when he tried to help the pedestrian move a roll of carpet from the middle of the road. Furthermore, the motion to exclude expert testimony filed by the driver who struck the pedestrian is granted in relation to the pedestrian's medical expert as a result of the pedestrian's failure to disclose the witness and his expected testimony.
Court: USDC Northern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: June 21, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv191, NOS: Motor Vehicle - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Negligence, Experts
J. Sargus denies the medical student's motion for a preliminary injunction, ruling her past performances on standardized tests and cognitive abilities when compared with the standard population do not weight in favor of her ADHD being considered a disability such that she should be given accommodations when she takes the MCAT exam. Additionally, the request for 50 percent extra time, as opposed to the standard 25 percent accommodation, is not supported by any medical evidence in the record.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: June 20, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv1241, NOS: Housing/Accommodations - Civil Rights, Categories: Ada / Rehabilitation Act, Education
J. Sargus denies both parties' motions for summary judgment, ruling that questions of fact regarding whether the company's employee was authorized to give a job offer to the applicant, as well as the lack of a written offer to the support the applicant's version of events, prevent judgment on the contract claim brought by the applicant.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: June 13, 2023, Case #: 2:20cv5664, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Contract, Employment Retaliation
J. Sargus grants, in part, the hernia mesh manufacturer's motion in limine, ruling evidence regarding other products made by the company will only be admitted if it is relative to the patients' injuries, not merely as an attempt to prove the manufacturer is a bad company. Additionally, testimony regarding the manufacturer's financial condition will be admitted only so far as it relates to the feasibility of alternative design studies that may have been conducted prior to the creation of the allegedly defective device.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: June 12, 2023, Case #: 2:18cv1022, NOS: Personal Injury - Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury/Product Liability - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Evidence, Health Care, Product Liability