Legal Opinion

David Hieber v. Oakland County, et al.

District Court, E.D. Michigan

Decided March 11, 2026No. 4:22-cv-11417Unknown

1Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION DAVID HIEBER, Case No. 22-11417 Plaintiff, F. Kay Behm v. United States District Judge OAKLAND COUNTY, et al., Defendants. ___________________________ / OPINION AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF No. 108) I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Plaintiff, David Hieber, has before the court a pretermination procedural due process claim. (ECF No. 102). Plaintiff originally brought claims of age discrimination under

42 U.S.C. § 1983

and Michigan’s Elliott- Larsen Civil Rights Act (“ELCRA”), denial of both pre- and…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Cleveland Board of Education v. LoudermillSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  5. McLean v. 988011 Ontario, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2000

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API