CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT
GENE RAYMOND BELL,JR.,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
CITY OF SOUTHFIELD, MICHIGAN,
Defendant,

ANTHONIE KORKIS, ARTHUR BRIDGEFORTH, and THOMAS LANGEWICZ, II, jointly and severally and in their individual capacities.
Defendants-Appellants.
   No. 21-1516
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit.
No. 2:19-cv-13565—Gershwin A. Drain, District Judge.
Argued: March 17, 2022
Decided and Filed: June 14, 2022
Before: WHITE, THAPAR, and LARSEN, Circuit Judges.


_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

THAPAR, Circuit Judge. When Gene Bell was pulled over, the police officer asked for his license, registration, and insurance, as officers commonly do. But Bell refused. Instead, he demanded to know why the officer had pulled him over. Yet the officer wanted Bell’s information first. After a tense stand-off, officers pulled Bell out of his vehicle, wrestled him to the ground, and tased him. Bell contends that the officers violated the Fourth Amendment’s bar against excessive force. The district court denied the officers qualified immunity, and they appealed. We dismiss in part, reverse in part, and remand.



CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT
TARRIFY PROPERTIES, LLC, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO,
Defendant-Appellee.
   No. 21-3801
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland.
No. 1:19-cv-02293—James S. Gwin, District Judge.
Argued: June 9, 2022
Decided and Filed: June 14, 2022
Before: SUTTON, Chief Judge; COLE and DONALD, Circuit Judges.


_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

SUTTON, Chief Judge. At stake is whether the district court correctly refused to certify a class of owners of foreclosed properties in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, all of whom challenge Ohio’s tax-foreclosure statute as a taking under the federal and state constitutions. While the claimants share a common legal theory—that the targeted Ohio law does not permit them to capture equity in their properties after the county transfers them to a land bank—they do not have a cognizable common theory for measuring the value in each property at the time of transfer. We affirm.