Case law

Cohen v. United States

722 F.3d 168 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 1, 2013

SEC, 883 F.2d 525, 531 (7th Cir. 1989) (“Courts cannot intelligently supervise the Commission‟s allocation of its staff‟s time, because although judges see clearly the claim an activity designed to be protective of the interest … Appellants cannot establish a “reasonable expectation that 16 discovery will reveal evidence of” any such policy. See Bell Atl. Corp. v.

Sean Burke v. Edward Bachert

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

The District Court dismissed Appellants’ claims at summary judgment, holding qualified immunity applied as it was not clearly established whether the community caretaking exception to the warrant requirement allows police … Appellants do not challenge the substance of the court’s immunity analysis.

Gamal Johnson, in No. 05-5029 v. Parole Agent David Knorr, Individually & as a Parole Officer for the Commonwealth of Penna. Parole Agent William Jones Individually & as a Parole Officer for the Commonwealth of Penna. Commonwealth of Penna. Dept. Of Probation & Parole Police Officer John Doe Individually & as a Police Officer for the City of Philadelphia Police Officer Richard Roe Individually & as a Police Officer for the City of Philadelphia City of Philadelphia. Gamal Johnson v. Parole Agent David M. Knorr, Individually & as a Parole Officer for the Commonwealth of Penna. Parole Agent William Jones, Individually & as a Parole Officer for the Commonwealth of Penna. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Dept. Of Probation and Parole Police Officer John Doe, Individually & as a Police Officer for the City of Philadelphia Police Officer Richard Roe, Individually & as a Police Officer for the City of Philadelphia City of Philadelphia. David Knorr, in No. 05-5139

477 F.3d 75 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 14, 2007

from suit based on the principles of sovereign immunity. … Nevertheless, according to Johnson, as he asserted in his brief opposing Knorr's motion for summary judgment, the complaint and the subsequent motions "clearly advise[d] [Agent Knorr] of all of the facts of a constitutional

Bloxson v. Borough of Wilkinsburg

110 F. App'x 279 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 5, 2004

right was clearly established. … constitutional right violated was clearly established.

Burtch v. Ganz

382 F.3d 325 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 24, 2004

“To establish prejudice, the party raising laches must demonstrate that the delay caused a disadvantage in asserting and establishing a claimed right or defense; the mere loss of what one would have otherwise kept does not … establish prejudice.”

Sample v. Diecks

885 F.2d 1099 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 12, 1989

One of the grounds of Appellants' motion to dismiss, filed on September 7, 1983, was qualified immunity. … The motion was denied on October 13, 1983, and Appellants have not appealed the qualified immunity decision of the district court.

Beaver Valley Power Company, a Pa. Corp. v. National Engineering & Contracting Co., an Ohio Corp. v. Michael Baker, Jr., Inc., 3rd Party Appeal of Beaver Valley Power Company

883 F.2d 1210 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 31, 1989

Therefore, plaintiff can recover only by establishing negligence or willful misconduct. … It is true, as stated, that the contractor may not plead such immunity.

Baltimore County v. Hechinger Liquidation Trust

335 F.3d 243 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 18, 2003

See SCS Bus. & Tech., 173 F.3d at 893 {“Steel Co.’s rule is premised on a court’s lack of power to reach the merits without establishing its jurisdiction. … Hilton, 618 F.2d 232 , 241 n. 7 (3d Cir.1980) (noting the paradox inherent in the fact that “it is clearly established that the state’s [sovereign] immunity can be waived by the state, despite the principle that a waiver

David Downs v. Borough of Jenkintown

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 16, 2021

Qualified immunity “shields public officials performing discretionary functions from § 1983 . . . liability ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … on the alternative ground that Locke did not violate a clearly established constitutional right.

In Re McAllister Towing & Transportation Co.

432 F.3d 216 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 21, 2005

In so doing, it discovered that the purpose behind the exclusivity provision was limited: The purpose of s[ection] 7(b), added in 1949, was to establish that, as between the government on the one hand … Co., 299 F.2d 789, 790-91 (3d Cir. 1962) (“Contribution of a joint tort-feasor toward the satisfaction of a covered government employee’s judgment in tort seems as clearly within the language of Section 7(b) as is total direct

United States v. Thomas P. Jasin

280 F.3d 355 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 5, 2002

The district court denied the motion on the grounds that La Duca had not been diligent in requesting that the government provide Neiman use immunity for his testimony. … Pionzio did not testify at trial, but later, under a grant of immunity, he provided grand jury testimony that appeared to exculpate Lowell.

State Line & Sullivan R. v. Phillips

98 F.2d 651 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 14, 1938

Whatever degree of proof may have been necessary to establish obsolescence prior to the decision of the Supreme Court in Burnet v. … A careful examination convinces us that appellant’s counsel asked for an exception, but whether such was or was not allowed by the trial judge does not appear clearly.

Aruanno v. Spagnuolo

292 F. App'x 184 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 15, 2008

In any case, we agree with the District Court that the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … clearly established statutory or constitutional law of which a reasonable person would have known.

Northern Michigan Hospitals, Inc. v. Health Net Federal Services, LLC

344 F. App'x 731 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 8, 2009

Instead, the dispute is over whether the hospitals’ claimed charges qualify for reimbursement as facility charges.” … But these reasons are not enough to excuse exhaustion and do not establish that exhausting administrative remedies would be futile.

Juvelis, Juvelis v. Snider

68 F.3d 648 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 10, 1995

A. 13 DPW maintains Niki neither is an "otherwise qualified" person, nor has been discriminated against because of his handicap. … DPW contends Niki is not "otherwise qualified" because he lacks the capacity to form the intent to establish Delaware County or Pennsylvania as his residence.

Wrench Transportation Systems, Inc. v. Bradley

212 F. App'x 92 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 21, 2006

as opposed to qualified immunity.3 A. … Absolute and Qualified Immunity. The Supreme Court first addressed prosecutorial immunity from suit under § 1983 in Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976).

Lambert v. Beard

633 F.3d 126 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 7, 2011

of clearly established Federal law.” … No more, in our view, need be said to make clear that finding that Lambert had not met the requirements of Brady was an unreasonable application of clearly established Supreme Court precedent.

Lowry v. City of Scranton

48 F. App'x 852 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 7, 2002

immunity. … The District Court did not say that, even taking the facts in the light most favorable to the Lowrys, the appellants are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Reichley v. Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture

427 F.3d 236 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 2, 2005

The court also dismissed plaintiffs’ claims against Hayes, concluding that they were either barred by the Eleventh Amendment or that he enjoyed qualified immunity.10 10 Appellants’ original complaint also … Here, even assuming that appellants could somehow establish an unconstitutional taking, the record would still not establish that Penn Ag Industries acted under color of state law.

Woodlen v. Jimenez

173 F. App'x 168 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 28, 2006

Jerry, 487 F.2d 600, 605 (3d Cir. 1973).2 Turning to Woodlen’s second argument, an official is not entitled to qualified immunity if he has violated a constitutional right and that right is clearly established … established.