This case is a declaratory judgment action filed by Capitol Specialty Insurance Corp. against Splash Dogs, LLC and Randy Woods seeking a ruling on whether its policy covers claims in an underlying lawsuit for copyright infringement, defamation, and related business torts brought by DockDogs against the defendants. Defendant Randy Woods moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue or alternatively to transfer venue to California. The court denied the motion, concluding that the Southern District of Ohio is a proper forum. It reasoned that Woods had transacted business in Ohio and the claims related to those contacts under Ohio's long-arm statute, as previously found in the underlying case, and that the plaintiff's choice of forum and the legal nature of the coverage dispute made transfer unwarranted.
This case involves a lawsuit by Kent D. Stuckey, as the authorized representative of former stockholders of Internet Transaction Solutions, Inc., against Online Resources Corporation following their 2007 merger. The plaintiff alleged breaches of the merger agreement, including failures to file a timely registration statement for stock issued to stockholders, provide sufficient price-protection shares, submit a net working capital statement, and honor escrow terms, along with claims of common-law fraud, fraudulent inducement, and Ohio securities law violations seeking rescission and damages. The court had previously dismissed several claims and, on the defendant's motion to dismiss the amended complaint, granted dismissal of the claims for untimely stock transfer processing, late net working capital calculation, and breach related to termination of a profit-sharing plan. The court denied dismissal of the breach-of-registration-rights claim, the fraud and securities fraud claims, the rescission request, and challenges to the plaintiff's representative authority, finding the amended pleadings sufficient to proceed on those issues under applicable Delaware contract law and Ohio tort and securities law.
This case involved an insurance company's claims against a railroad company for damage to automobile parts sustained during a train derailment while the goods were being transported under a through bill of lading from Japan to Ohio. The plaintiff, as subrogee of the shipper, asserted claims including breach of contract and negligence after the railroad's train derailed. The court granted summary judgment to the defendant railroad and denied the plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on damages. The core reasoning was that the bill of lading contained an unambiguous covenant not to sue the ocean carrier's subcontractors, which included the railroad, and this contractual provision was enforceable and barred all of the plaintiff's claims.
The case involves the resentencing of defendant Robert Shull, who was convicted by a jury of possession with intent to distribute more than 50 grams of crack cocaine under 21 U.S.C. § 841 after his conspiracy count was reversed on appeal. The original 121-month sentence was vacated and remanded by the Sixth Circuit for de novo resentencing. The court examined the history of the 100:1 crack-to-powder cocaine sentencing disparity established by the Anti-Drug Abuse Acts of 1986 and 1988, the U.S. Sentencing Commission's reports criticizing the ratio, and the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, which reduced the ratio to 18:1 and eliminated the five-year mandatory minimum for simple possession. The court held that the Fair Sentencing Act applies to defendants like Shull whose offenses predated the Act but whose sentencing occurs afterward, relying on the statutory text, congressional intent, and precedents from other circuits and district courts.
The case involved a dispute between the City of Lancaster, Ohio, and Flagstar Bank (as assignee of developer Island Capital) over a Tax Increment Financing agreement that used letters of credit to secure service payments in lieu of property taxes for funding public improvements via municipal bonds. After Island Capital failed to provide a timely replacement letter of credit and Flagstar's credit rating was downgraded, the City drew on the existing letter of credit; Flagstar's counterclaims challenged the validity of that draw and the City's planned use of the proceeds. The court granted the City's motion to dismiss two counterclaim counts for failure to state a claim, granted judgment on the pleadings in the City's favor on one count of the complaint, and denied judgment on the pleadings as to a remaining counterclaim count. The court reasoned that the agreement's plain terms authorized the draw for non-compliance and that its language on applying proceeds to "Debt Service" was ambiguous as to whether funds had to be used only proportionally to Island Capital's share, precluding judgment on the pleadings.
This case involves current and former Mortgage Loan Officers at Huntington National Bank alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Ohio wage laws for unpaid overtime and improper deductions from pay under the bank's commission-based compensation plans. Plaintiffs, including named and opt-in participants, sought conditional certification of a nationwide FLSA class, court-supervised notice, and protective orders addressing the bank's communications and back-wage acknowledgments. The court granted conditional certification for the nationwide FLSA class after determining the employees were similarly situated in their duties and pay structure, ordered the parties to propose notice procedures, and granted in part the request for corrective notice while denying some requests to void acknowledgments and for sanctions. The core reasoning rested on FLSA standards for overtime exemptions and collective action procedures under 29 U.S.C. § 216(b).
