Plaintiffs' reply in support of their motion for partial summary judgment
Plaintiffs' reply in support of their motion for partial summary judgment
Plaintiffs' reply in support of their motion for partial summary judgment
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Case 2:08-cv-00575-GLF-NMK Document 75 Filed 01/14/10 Page 5 <strong>of</strong> 54<br />
Cook v. Colgate,<br />
992 F.2d 17 (2d. Cir. 1993)......................................................................................................26<br />
Donovan v. Punxsutawney Area Sch. Bd.,<br />
336 F.3d 211 (3d. Cir. 2003)....................................................................................................31<br />
Fleischfresser v. Dir. <strong>of</strong> Sch. Dist. 200,<br />
15 F.3d 680 (7th Cir. 1994) .....................................................................................................26<br />
Holloman ex rel. Holloman v. Harland,<br />
370 F.3d 1252 (11th Cir. 2004) ...............................................................................................24<br />
Lee v. York Co. Sch. Div.,<br />
484 F.3d 687 (4th Cir. 2007) .......................................................................................33, 36, 37<br />
Roberts v. Madigan,<br />
921 F.2d 1047 (10th Cir. 1990) .........................................................................................35, 36<br />
Talley v. Family Dollar Stores <strong>of</strong> Ohio, Inc.,<br />
542 F.3d 1099 (6th Cir. 2008) ...........................................................................................15, 18<br />
Wilson v. Luttrell,<br />
No. 99-5459, 2000 WL 1359624 (6th Cir. Sept. 13, 2000) .....................................................25<br />
FEDERAL DISTRICT COURTS<br />
Daugherty v. Vanguard Charter Sch. Acad.,<br />
116 F. Supp. 2d 897 (W.D. Mich. 2000) .................................................................................27<br />
Doe v. Harlan Co. Sch. Dist.,<br />
96 F. Supp. 2d 667 (E.D. Ky. 2000) ........................................................................................28<br />
Doe v. Wilson Co. Sch. Sys.,<br />
564 F. Supp. 2d 766 (M.D. Tenn. 2008)................................................................26, 27, 31, 34<br />
Weimer v. Honda <strong>of</strong> Am. Mfg., Inc.,<br />
No. 2:06-cv-844, 2008 WL 2557252 (S.D. Ohio June 23, 2008)............................................44<br />
OHIO SUPREME COURT<br />
A&B-Abell Elevator Co., Inc. v. Columbus/Cent. Ohio Bldg. & Constr. Trades Council,<br />
651 N.E.2d 1283 (Ohio 1995) .................................................................................................12<br />
Hecht v. Lev<strong>in</strong>,<br />
613 N.E.2d 585 (Ohio 1993) .....................................................................................................8<br />
Jacobs v. Frank,<br />
573 N.E.2d 609 (Ohio 1991) ...................................................................................................12<br />
ii