U.S. Sixth Circuit - FindLaw

U.S. Sixth Circuit - The FindLaw 6th Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries Blog

It is a rare benchslap that lasts seven pages. It's not uncommon to see a paragraph or two that mocks a party's unreasonable position. And we've seen Judge Kethledge mock parties' unreasonable stances before, but a full seven pages? Well done, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission -- you've surpassed the "golden sombrero" to reach a whole new level of ineptitude.

What caused the seven page rant/affirmed dismissal? Only a hypocritical lawsuit supported by a comical attempt at producing scientific methodology in support a frivolous case of alleged disparate impact discrimination.

By now, many have heard of Judge Boyce F. Martin's ignominious departure from the Sixth Circuit bench. The former chief was forced into retirement after a travel expenses reimbursement scandal, one that ended with him agreeing to retire quietly and pay back all of his travel expenses, even those that were undisputed. Nonetheless, Chief Judge Alice Batchelder referred the case to the Justice Department, which decided against bringing charges.

It's been a dark end to a long and notable legal career. In his time on the bench, Martin wrote more than 1,500 opinions, including the first opinion upholding Obamacare, and more notably, the Sixth Circuit's take on Grutter v. Bollinger, an opinion that fractured the court and publicized the infighting in a series of concurrences and appendices.

Late last week, a district court in Michigan held that the state's constitutional provision and implementing laws the defined marriage as "the union of one man and one woman" violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In making such a holding, that court joined countless other courts across the nation, but unlike many of those courts, the district court denied the state's request for a stay pending appeal.

The Sixth Circuit granted an emergency stay (after a few hundred marriage licenses were handed out to same-sex couples), and yesterday afternoon, continue the stay until the circuit court could hear the appeal.

3 Tips For New Attorneys in The 6th Circuit

New attorneys practicing in the Sixth Circuit will have to learn the local court rules and make sure that their case will go as smoothly as possible (procedurally, anyway).

Whether it's getting acclimated to the court's e-filing system, or knowing the security measures for entering the building, here are three tips to get you started.

After Kentucky's somewhat harried search for a firm to defend the state from the potential "chaos" of recognizing out-of-state gay marriages, a firm has been chosen.

The relatively small firm of VanAntwerp, Monge, Jones, Edwards & McCann, LLP has been recruited to defend the state in the Sixth Circuit for at least until June 6, according to Louisville's WFPL. Their contract with the Bluegrass State has a payment cap set at $100,000.

But what will the VanAntwerp firm be doing for that money?

Kentucky is still going to defend its gay marriage ban before the Sixth Circuit, but not with the help of anyone employed by the state.

After Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway refused to defend the same-sex marriage prohibition, citing his refusal to "defend[] discrimination," the governor announced that outside counsel will be hired to represent the state's interests in the appeal, reports The Associated Press.

With Kentucky taxpayer money set to pay for private attorneys, this battle over same-sex unions just got hotter.

Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine, we couldn't agree more.

Folks, Ohio has this ridiculous election law that bars people from making false statements with malice about candidates. It's a load of crap, restricts speech, is far from content-neutral, and basically makes political satire illegal.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly stated that the remedy for false speech is more speech, not some unconstitutional law that will die an expensive (litigating the issue up to the Supreme Court can't be cheap) death. And now, according to The Columbus Dispatch, the state's Attorney General just took the same position, hopefully nuking the case before Ohio further embarrasses itself.

It's no secret that the Sixth Circuit is having some trouble with crack sentencing. But it's not just Fair Sentencing Act changes, or retroactivity, or their own muddled precedent that they keep botching. They're also having issues with differentiating a felony from a misdemeanor for purposes of priors and with statutes of limitations.

To be fair, this is all North Carolina's fault. Their determinative sentencing scheme, which takes into account past crimes, the nature of the present crime, and other individualized factors to determine an appropriate sentence is far more complicated than "give 'em a few decades." And the Sixth Circuit isn't the only circuit to struggle with NC's sentencing; the Fourth, being more local, has gone back-and-forth on the issue.

One of these cases is not like the others. While many parties have challenged states' gay marriage bans generally, and others have targeted a state's refusal to recognize other states' same-sex couplings, the Ohio gay marriage case was especially narrow, focusing on the listing of one's spouse on his or her death certificate.

The plaintiffs, who were seeking recognition of their same-sex marriages (legally entered into in other states) on their deceased loved one's death certificates, triumphed in the district court. Now, they've asked the Sixth Circuit to expedite the appeal, reports Equality on Trial.

Battery is an intentional tort.

Malpractice is negligence-based tort.

One requires intent. The other is failing to meet the reasonable standard of care. Any 1L could tell you this. Why is this case in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals then?