Case law

Hampe v. Butler

364 F.3d 90 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 7, 2004

Caterpillar, Inc., 959 F.2d 430 , 449 n.2 (3d Cir.1992) ("[T]he general rule that a district court decision may be affirmed on an alternative ground is well established."). … Significantly, the plaintiffs qualify their assertion with the word "if."

Wilkerson v. Klem

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 28, 2005

Accordingly, the state court decision we review is not “contrary to . . . clearly established” Supreme Court law. … of clearly established federal law and holding that it could); Tucker v.

Garden State Electrical Inspection Services Inc. v. Levin

144 F. App'x 247 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 5, 2005

Second, the official asserted the qualified immunity defense throughout the course of the proceedings. This defense is only available when government officials are sued in their personal, not official, capacity. Id. … defense, such as qualified immunity, that is available in personal capacity suits.

Donell Prince v. Thomas Aiellos

594 F. App'x 742 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 2, 2014

Aiellos filed this interlocutory appeal claiming that he is entitled to qualified immunity. … II Although our jurisdiction to review interlocutory orders denying qualified immunity is well established, we review only legal questions to determine whether the facts alleged support a violation of clearly established

In Re: Diet Drugs

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 11, 2008

“[Patterson] has not established that the ‘maximum regurgitant jet’ offered in support of her claim is representative of her level of mitral regurgitation, therefore, on this basis as well, [Patterson] has failed to establish … Accordingly, if an echocardiogram shows a normal amount of regurgitation – i.e., clearly below the qualifying threshold – an auditing cardiologist need not measure the maximum jet.

Wedgewood Village v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 1, 2005

“An abuse of discretion arises when ‘the District Court’s decision rests upon a clearly erroneous finding of fact, an errant conclusion of law or an improper application of law to fact.’” Id. … Thus, Congress clearly stated by the very terms of the 1962 amendments that those amendments were not intended to alter the FDA’s preexisting authority.

In re Torchia

188 F. 207 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 20, 1911

It therefore passed to the trustee with the same restriction that qualified it in the bankrupt’s own hands. … These creditors owned certain mortgages and mechanics’ liens; but it appears clearly that they would have suffered no injury at all, even if the bankrupt himself had been paid the money, for the mortgagees had still an ample

United States v. Cuthbertson

651 F.2d 189 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 29, 1981

the privilege .... ” Id. at 148 . *192 We also established guidelines for the district courts to use in applying rule 17(c) to subpoenas duces tecum directed to third parties. … If facts found by the trial court are controverted, we apply the “clearly erroneous” rule.

Strathie v. Department of Transportation

716 F.2d 227 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 8, 1983

After working for Van Trans as a school bus driver for one day, Strathie was notified by the Department of Transportation that his Class 4 license was suspended indefinitely and until his competency was established. … Cole’s deposition could be read to say that a stereo hearing aid does not fully cure the sound localization difficulties of any hearing aid wearer, there is testimony from expert Leidy which is clearly to the contrary.

United States v. Princeton Gamma-Tech, Inc.

31 F.3d 138 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 1, 1994

Id. at 1023 . 65 Boarhead is clearly distinguishable and does not control the matter before us for two crucial reasons. … Even though it is a potentially responsible party, Gamma-Tech could qualify as a plaintiff in a citizens' suit alleging irreparable harm to the environment.

United States of America and Kenneth J. Kalemba, Special Agent, Internal Revenue Service v. Amerada Hess Corporation

619 F.2d 980 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 18, 1980

Clearly the IRS has, in all cases, made an institutional decision to divide its investigations into civil and criminal segments. … Indisputably, the Milbank report qualifies as material prepared or collected in anticipation of possible litigation. 599 F.2d at 1228-29 .

Dorothy L. Draper, Individually and as General Administratrix and Administratrix Ad Prosequendum of the Estate of Robert W. Draper, Deceased v. Airco, Inc. And United States Steel Corporation, Airco, Inc., and Third-Party in No. 77-1836 v. W. v. Pangborne & Co., Inc., Third-Party in No. 77-1837. Appeal of United States Steel Corporation in No. 77-1905

580 F.2d 91 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 28, 1978

Heavner was described as establishing a "limited and special exception" which was not applicable. Id. at 333. See also Mellk v. … Heintz Manufacturing Co., 385 Pa. 296 , 122 A.2d 699 (1956), as establishing its immunity from suit is misplaced. That case provides no immunity for an employer who does not otherwise qualify as a statutory employer.

Philadelphia National Bank and Philadelphia National Corporation v. United States

666 F.2d 834 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 11, 1981

The Authority was formed to construct and operate toll bridges and tunnels in the New York area, was granted the power of-eminent domain and was immunized from suit. … This is clearly demonstrated by Burton v.

Medcalf v. Trustees of University of Pennsylvania

71 F. App'x 924 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 30, 2003

In addition, the remarks that she made regarding her desire to put a woman in the position were clearly related to the search process for the specific position Medcalf applied for, such that they may properly be considered … A rational jury also could have found that Carolyn Femovich, who was clearly acting in a managerial capacity in the scope of her employment, acted with the requisite malice or reckless indifference to the federally protected

National Shooting Sports Foundation v. Attorney General New Jersey

80 F.4th 215 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 17, 2023

It also requires industry members to “establish, im- plement, and enforce reasonable controls” on these activities. 4 § 2C:58-35(a)(2). … Though the Law clearly regu- lates selling and marketing guns, whether the Foundation’s in- tended conduct is arguably forbidden is murky. And in the same vein, they also undermine the threat of enforcement. C.

Tsangarakis v. Panama Steamship Co.

397 F.2d 806 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 9, 1968

unable to determine the cause of death, and because of lack of medical evidence, the Coroner’s jury was unable to reach a verdict as to the cause of death.” 3 The trial judge had the opportunity to observe the doctors and qualified … testified concerning the possible movement of the larnyx, part of the bronchial tube, and part of the lower trachea into the chest cavity during the embalming process and his evaluation of this testimony is certainly not clearly

Thomas v. City of Erie

236 F. App'x 772 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 8, 2007

We ask whether the right was clearly established at the time of the violation. Id. at 141. … If it was not clearly established, then the officials are entitled to qualified immunity, and the plaintiff’s claim must be dismissed. Thomas challenges the actions of the Defendants on two grounds.

Frank Noonan v. Kathleen Kane

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 12, 2022

In its view, the claims that Kane had retaliated against Appellants by defaming them did not violate any clearly established right. Id. at 601, 5 We discuss qualified immunity in greater depth below. … The District Court observed that Kane’s 13 actions did not violate any clearly established right of the Appellants and concluded qualified immunity was applicable.

Brody v. Spang

957 F.2d 1108 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 28, 1992

As appellants point out, this consent decree provision, on its face, clearly permits an infringement of otherwise existing First Amendment rights of students. … In the remedial phase, however, the Fitzgerald group’s interests have clearly diverged from those of school officials.

Fields v. Option One Mortgage Corp.

283 F. App'x 897 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 27, 2008

The District Court affirmed, holding that the Bankruptcy Court did not clearly err in finding that there was insufficient evidence that Option One knew or should have known that Fields qualified for the refinance rate. … Mortgage Co., 164 Fed.Appx. 221 (3d Cir.2006), cited by the Bankruptcy Court and District Court and relied upon by Option One, is a not-precedential opinion in which the section 5.3 evidentiary requirement was imposed to establish