CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT |
CRISTI CAMPBELL, Administratrix of the Estate of
Bryana Baker,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
APRIL RIAHI, individually and in her official capacity
as an employee of Butler County, Ohio; RICHARD K.
JONES, individually and in his official capacity as
Sheriff of Butler County, Ohio; BUTLER COUNTY,
OHIO; BUTLER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS,
Defendants-Appellees. |
No. 23-3793 |
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio at Cincinnati.
No. 1:20-cv-00678—Douglas Russell Cole, District Judge.
Argued: June 12, 2024
Decided and Filed: July 29, 2024
Before: KETHLEDGE, LARSEN, and BLOOMEKATZ, Circuit Judges.
_________________________
OPINION
_________________________
KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judge. In September 2018, Bryana Baker committed suicide in
the Butler County Jail, where she had been booked following her arrest on state charges. Baker’s
mother, Cristi Campbell, thereafter brought this suit against the County Defendants, Sheriff
Richard Jones, and a corrections officer, April Riahi, asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983
and Ohio law. The district court granted summary judgment to the defendants. We affirm. |
CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT |
MARC M. SUSSELMAN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
WASHTENAW COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE; JONATHAN
KING; WASHTENAW COUNTY, MICHIGAN; SUPERIOR
TOWNSHIP, MICHIGAN,
Defendants-Appellees. |
No. 23-1486 |
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit.
No. 2:20-cv-12278—Bernard A. Friedman, District Judge.
Argued: March 21, 2024
Decided and Filed: July 29, 2024
Before: GIBBONS, BUSH, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.
_________________________
OPINION
_________________________
JOHN K. BUSH, Circuit Judge. Marc Susselman made a federal case out of a traffic
ticket. In February 2020, he drove around a police cruiser parked across the eastbound lane of
traffic with its lights flashing. A Washtenaw County Sheriff’s deputy issued him a ticket for
failing to yield. That ticket was dropped and, soon after, Susselman received another citation
arising from the same incident for failing to obey a police officer directing traffic. The Michigan
circuit court ultimately dismissed the second traffic ticket. In federal court, Susselman asserted
constitutional and state law claims against Washtenaw County, the Washtenaw County Sheriff’s
Office, the sheriff’s deputy, and Superior Township, Michigan. The district court granted the
defendants’ motions to dismiss all claims against them. We affirm. |
CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT |
PARENTS DEFENDING EDUCATION,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
OLENTANGY LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF
EDUCATION; MARK T. RAIFF, in his official capacity as
Superintendent of Olentangy Local School District;
PETER STERN, in his official capacity as Olentangy’s
Assistant Director of Equity and Inclusion; RANDY
WRIGHT, in his official capacity as Olentangy’s Chief
of Administrative Services; KEVIN DABERKOW, in his
official capacity as a member of the Olentangy Board
of Education; BRANDON LESTER, in his official
capacity as a member of the Olentangy Board of
Education; KEVIN O’BRIEN, in his official capacity as
a member of the Olentangy Board of Education;
LIBBY WALLICK, in her official capacity as a member
of the Olentangy Board of Education; LAKESHA WYSE,
in her official capacity as a member of the Olentangy
Board of Education,
Defendants-Appellees. |
No. 23-3630 |
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio at Columbus.
No. 2:23-cv-01595—Algenon L. Marbley, Chief District Judge.
Argued: February 1, 2024
Decided and Filed: July 29, 2024
Before: BATCHELDER, STRANCH, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
_________________________
OPINION
_________________________
JANE B. STRANCH, Circuit Judge. This case concerns a pre-enforcement challenge to
school district policies that prohibit harassment based on a variety of protected characteristics,
including—as relevant here—gender identity. The Olentangy Local School District, Ohio’s
fourth largest, promulgated several anti-harassment and anti-bullying policies. The policies
prohibit students from repeatedly and intentionally using non-preferred pronouns to refer to their
classmates. On behalf of certain parents and students, Plaintiff Parents Defending Education
(PDE) seeks to enjoin the policies’ enforcement based on the First Amendment’s Free Speech
Clause. The district court determined that PDE had not met its burden to justify injunctive relief.
We AFFIRM. |
|