Case law

Michael Revak v. National Mines Corporation and Old Republic Companies, and Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, Party-In-Interest

808 F.2d 996 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 3, 1987

.-203(a), or must the AU find the presumption triggered so long as the claimant adduces a single piece of qualifying evidence establishing disability. … This is clearly not the case *1002 with respect to the interim criteria.

John Green v. America Online (Aol) John Does 1 & 2

318 F.3d 465 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 16, 2003

We also agree that Green’s tort claims are subject to AOL’s immunity under 47 U.S.C. § 230 . … We agree with the District Court that section 230 immunizes AOL in this circumstance.

Stanley Summerville v. Joseph Fuentes

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 10, 2021

is not clearly established. … Through this timely interlocutory appeal, Detective Gregory challenges two legal aspects of the District Court’s denial of qualified immunity: that neither the initial detention nor its length violated clearly established

Donatelli v. Mitchell

2 F.3d 508 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 13, 1993

Rather, they argued that wherever a court were to draw the line, the 0% "core constituency" that exists in the new 44th district would clearly fall below it. … II, § 15; and that the members of the Commission are entitled to qualified immunity from the damages claim under Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982).

Lavia v. Pennsylvania, Department of Corrections

224 F.3d 190 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 8, 2000

abrogating state immunity. … In doing so, Congress clearly defined the ADA’s purpose 5 and made extensive findings *198 with respect to the discrimination suffered by the disabled in the United States. 6 Title I of the ADA covers all public and private

Samuel Randolph, IV v. Secretary Pennsylvania Departm

5 F.4th 362 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 20, 2021

And in this case, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision involved an unreasonable applica- tion of clearly established Sixth Amendment law. … For these reasons, we are satisfied that the decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court involved an unreasonable appli- cation of clearly established Sixth Amendment law.

Martin v. Cooper Electric Supply Co.

940 F.2d 896 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 8, 1991

This conclusion is not clearly erroneous. … This determination is not clearly erroneous.

Carter v. McGrady

292 F.3d 152 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 29, 2002

immunity. … The District Court concluded that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because Carter did not have a constitutional right to act as a jailhouse lawyer and granted their motion for summary judgment, from which

Jonathan Voorhis v. Patrick Ginkel

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 5, 2025

Voorhis’s false imprisonment claim also likely lacks merit but, regardless, Ginkel is entitled to qualified immunity from that claim, too. … Ginkel argued in the District Court that he is entitled to qualified immunity from Voorhis’s malicious prosecution claim. See ECF No. 17 at 8-9.

Planned Parenthood v. Attorney General

297 F.3d 253 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 11, 2002

The AG in the present case clearly played a pivotal role. … Moreover, plaintiffs’ declarations establish appropriate staffing by demonstrating that the various attorneys were assigned specific tasks.

Edith P. Goodwin v. Hartford Life Insurance Company

491 F.2d 332 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 14, 1974

Indeed, if such a finding had been made, we feel that it would have been clearly erroneous. … Given these facts, we feel compelled to conclude that good faith is not established since, under the language of Watt Estate , the appellee’s deceased husband clearly had, at a minimum, “the means of knowledge of the truth

United States of America, Defendant/third-Party v. State of Hawaii, Third-Party

832 F.2d 1116 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 17, 1987

We conclude that nothing in the 1981 amendment, the preamble to the amendment, or the legislative history establishes a congressional intent to displace liability the states might have for torts of National Guard personnel … The amendment will not apply retroactively unless the legislature clearly intended to apply it retroactively.

Nijhawan v. Attorney General of the United States

523 F.3d 387 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 2, 2008

Clearly, the phrase is, as the BIA found, qualifying and does not constitute a provable element. … In fact, this very clearly distinguishes Obasahan and Knutsen , cases with which we agree. .

2 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1024, 2 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 10,310

431 F.2d 1254 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 23, 1970

May 28, 1968, the defendant, Superintendent of Schools in the City of Newark Franklyn Titus, acting under color of law for the Newark School System, subjected the plaintiffs to deprivation of their rights, privileges or immunities … and all positions hereafter created in new categories not existing shall be adequately publicized in every school at least sixty (60) days before the appointment is made and the qualifications for the positions shall be clearly

Peter Kowalchick v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor

893 F.2d 615 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 12, 1990

, it does not necessarily do so if there is contradictory evidence in the record; rather, a claimant must establish one of the qualifying facts by a preponderance of the evidence. … None of Kowalchick’s blood gas tests qualified. 2 . 20 C.F.R. § 727.203 (b) provides: The presumption in paragraph (a) of this section shall be rebutted if: (1) The evidence establishes that the individual is, in fact, doing

Sterling v. Borough of Minersville

232 F.3d 190 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 6, 2000

The court further ruled that the officers were not entitled to qualified immunity since their conduct violated Wayman’s clearly established right to privacy as protected by the Constitution. … We have previously set forth the analytical framework for deciding qualified immunity claims. First, we must determine if the plaintiff has alleged a deprivation of a clearly established constitutional right. Assaf v.

Delaware Valley Conservation Ass'n v. Resor

392 F.2d 331 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 8, 1968

Domestic & Foreign Commerce Corp., supra, 337 U.S. at page 687 , 69 S.Ct. at page 1460 . *334 The test established in Larson was reaffirmed in Malone v. … For example, it is claimed that § 15.1 of the Delaware River Basin Compact, 75 Stat. 688 , 715, waives immunity.

WINSETT v. McGINNES

617 F.2d 996 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 24, 1980

Strickland, supra, the Supreme Court recognized a qualified immunity for school board members. … First, the Court stated: 48 (T)he immunity defense would be unavailing to petitioners if the constitutional right allegedly infringed by them was clearly established at the time of their challenged conduct, if they knew or

Obado v. UMDNJ, Behavioral Health Center

524 F. App'x 812 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 23, 2013

2) if so, was that right so clearly established at the time of the defendant‟s actions that he or she would have reason to know that his or her conduct was wrongful? … In this regard, we may correct a district court‟s erroneous conclusion at the first step of the qualified immunity inquiry.

GARCIA, Emilio, Appellant, v. SCHWEIKER, Richard S., Secretary Department of Health and Human Services

829 F.2d 396 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 21, 1987

The fact of the matter is, however, that the agency’s position clearly offended established precedent. … The mere fact, however, that one private counsel and one non-profit agency did not wish to handle Garcia’s claim does not establish limited availability of qualified attorneys for the case.