Legal Opinion

Cremeans v. City of Roseville

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided October 28, 1988No. Nos. 86-1401, 86-1446PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ENGEL, Chief Judge.

This action is before us on cross-appeals by the plaintiff Jack R. Cremeans and by defendants Thomas H. Asman and Thomas VanDamme. Cremeans claims that the trial court erred in refusing to reinstate him to his position as a patrolman following a favorable jury verdict on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim. Asman and VanDamme allege that as a matter of law plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to create a jury question that plaintiff’s right to procedural due process was violated. Asman and VanDamme do not argue on appeal that they were entitled to qualified immunity. They…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. Morrissey v. BrewerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  4. Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
  5. Cleveland Board of Education v. LoudermillSupreme Court of the United States · 1985

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Bettio v. Village of NorthfieldDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1991
  2. Wagner v. City of MemphisDistrict Court, W.D. Tennessee · 1997
  3. Patricia Scaife v. Racine CountyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2001
  4. Merrell v. Bay County Metropolitan Transportation AuthorityDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1989
  5. Cremeans v. City Of RosevilleCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1988

5 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