Case law

Riverview Packing Co., Inc. v. Reconstruction Finance Corp. Appeal of Reconstruction Finance Corp. Appeal of Riverview Packing Co., Inc

207 F.2d 361 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 2, 1953

price control program and operated as compensatory in nature so as to validate a lower level of maximum meat prices than otherwise would have been permissible under the Emergency Price Control Act. 14 Meat slaughterers who qualified … The Thekla, 1924, 266 U.S. 328 , 45 S.Ct. 112 , 69 L.Ed. 313 , regardless of any claim of governmental immunity.

Acierno v. Cloutier

40 F.3d 597 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 18, 1994

in nature, or did not abrogate a clearly established property interest. … In a recent discussion of the "clearly established" right aspect of the qualified immunity determination, we stated: The right an official is alleged to have violated must have been "clearly established

Luis Dutton Myrie v. Attorney General United State

855 F.3d 509 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 28, 2017

Next, the IJ assesses whether the likely response from public officials qualifies as acquiescence under the governing regulations. … In any subsequent opinions in this case, the BIA should endeavor to explain clearly which conclusions of the IJ it is reviewing and which standard it is applying in so doing.

David Holt, II v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

683 F. App'x 151 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 20, 2017

“[Q]ualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … She is thus entitled to qualified immunity. See Mammaro v. N.J.

Harold C. Blanks v. Murco Drilling Corp., Defendant-Third Party Federal Insurance Co., Third Party v. Anr Production Co., New York Marine & General Insurance Co., Third Party

766 F.2d 891 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 29, 1985

Although there was no written contract between ANR and Consolidated, Consolidated was clearly working directly for ANR and for ANR's benefit. … This absurd result would defeat the purpose of granting immunity to a principal.

75 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 1499, 72 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 45,140 Newark Branch, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Jersey City Branch, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People New Jersey State Conference, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. City of Bayonne, New Jersey

134 F.3d 113 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 13, 1998

Carere, 85 F.3d 481, 485-86 (10th Cir.1996) ("[W]e may reverse the trial court's finding of no discriminatory intent only if it is clearly erroneous.... [T]his standard of review [is] well established."); Bernard v. … Those cases appear to point to the "bottom line" to establish a prima facie case.

Lunderstadt v. Colafella

885 F.2d 66 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 17, 1989

In affirming the broad scope of legislative immunity, the Court in Tenney explained, "[i]nvestigations, whether by standing or special committees, are an established part of representative government. … Apparently in response to the statement in appellees' brief that appellants challenge on appeal only the dismissal of the post-August 4, 1986 statements, appellants in their reply brief state merely that "[t]he court clearly

Morgan v. Perry

142 F.3d 670 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 5, 1998

not waive sovereign immunity for an award of backpay." … . §§ 822-29 , establish the mechanics of convening a court-martial and the composition of its members.

In the Matter of U. S. Hoffman Can Corp., a Corporation of the State of New York, and Commercial Can Corp., a Corporation of the State of New Jersey, Bankrupts. Robert Hirsch and Harold Roth

373 F.2d 622 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 10, 1967

Appellants are not immune from possible criminal proceedings because of § 7(a) (10) of the Bankruptcy Act ( 11 U.S.C. § 25 (a) (10)), which invests a bankrupt with immunity from criminal proceedings because of "testimony" … Appellants are not relieved of their duty under the Bankruptcy Act because, as they argue, the Referee could have called on the petitioning creditors 4 or could have appointed a qualified accountant 5 to prepare and file

O'Leary v. Social Security Board

153 F.2d 704 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 29, 1946

question concerning the claimant’s employment is to be settled in accordance with what the Roman Catholic Church, itself, declares through its ecclesiastical law, through its authorized spokesmen and through the rules it establishes … The following statements, we think, clearly demonstrate the complete correctness of the Board in its decision in this case.

Breakwell v. Allegheny County Department of Human Services

406 F. App'x 593 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 22, 2010

The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … To determine whether Terlecki and DeDominicis are entitled to qualified immunity, we must first determine if the Breakwells have adequately alleged a violation of a constitutional or statutory right that was clearly established

United States v. Lewisburg Area School District

539 F.2d 301 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 16, 1976

It has long been established that the United States may bring suit to protect its sovereign interest notwithstanding the lack of any immediate pecuniary interest in the outcome of the litigation. 7 In cases brought by the … Although a state can qualify the exclusive jurisdiction which it cedes to the United States over land purchased for an Art.

Pikel v. Garrett

55 F. App'x 29 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 7, 2002

Discussion Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity if “a reasonable officer could have believed that [the] conduct was lawful, in light of the clearly established … Thus, the appellants are entitled to qualified immunity even if they “reasonably but mistakenly” concluded that their conduct was lawful given the clearly established law in 1996 - when the search occurred.

Cohen v. City of Philadelphia

736 F.2d 81 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 6, 1984

, or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States. … The first prong of the test is clearly met in this case: Philadelphia and the individual defendants undisputedly acted under color of state law.

John Fiore v. City of Bethlehem

510 F. App'x 215 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 18, 2013

The doctrine of qualified immunity insulates government officials ―‗from liability from civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … The District Court held that the arresting officers were entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established that they lacked probable cause to arrest Mr. Fiore. We agree.7 Mr.

In Re the Complaint of Robert A. Tittle for Exoneration From or Limitation of Liability as the Owner of the M/v Adios v. Nicholas Aldacosta and Brenda Aldacosta, Third-Party v. Mike Tittle, Third-Party Cross v. Northwestern National Insurance Co., Cross

544 F.2d 752 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 3, 1977

His burden is a heavy one then in meeting the congressional policy goals, although of course pleasure vessels and sporting charter vessels may well qualify as "seagoing vessels" 46 U.S.C. § 183 (f). 19 Where the physical … (knowledge and privity are much nearer at hand in the case of a pleasure craft than in the impersonal relationship of an investor-owner to a seldom seen cargo vessel. 20 On the circumstances of this case Owner cannot immunize

Becker v. Interstate Properties

569 F.2d 1203 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 21, 1977

Johnson; 44 since they represent the only extensive judicial discussion of the issue aside from Ma jestic. 45 Coleman is more clearly distinguishable. … Those cases may establish still another exception to employer immunity. . Supra note 20. . 117 N.J.Super. 444 -45, 285 A.2d at 62 . . 56 N.J. 482, 487 , 267 A.2d 481, 484 (1970) quoting Long v.

Zurzola v. General Motors Corp.

503 F.2d 403 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 17, 1974

Had Immer been held retroactive, the contribution actions at issue here would clearly be permissible under New Jersey law. … Since Puller clearly contemplated that the husband could not recover- directly from his wife even in these circumstances, Justice Roberts’ theory would narrow the scope of interspousal immunity.

Donahue v. Gavin

280 F.3d 371 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 7, 2002

Government officials exercising discretionary functions have qualified immunity from suits seeking damages under S 1983 "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … Thus, the district court should only have considered the defendants' claim of immunity if Donahue first established that their conduct violated a clearly established statutory or constitutional right. Wilson v.

William Ansell v. Ross Twp

419 F. App'x 209 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 25, 2011

In reviewing a denial of qualified immunity at the motion to dismiss stage, we accept Ansell‟s allegations as true and draw all inferences in his favor. … A two-step analysis governs the assessment of a government official‟s entitlement to qualified immunity: first, whether a constitutional right was violated, and second, whether that right was “clearly established” at the