Case law

Ronald Greenland v. United States

661 F. App'x 210 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 22, 2016

, and Benson has qualified immunity. … Alternatively, the Magistrate Judge determined that Benson was immune from suit under the doctrine of qualified immunity.

United States v. Gregory Brown

765 F.3d 185 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 2, 2014

He also determined that the 2005 terroristic threats conviction did not qualify as a predicate offense because the documents supporting that conviction did not definitively establish under which subsection of the statute … [that] clearly involves violence.” Id. at 222-23.

In Re: Cendant Corporation Litigation

264 F.3d 201 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 11, 1992

The Fourth Girsh Factor: The Risks of Establishing Liability . C-» CO (M 5. The Fifth Girsh Factor: The Risks of Establishing Damages. CO CO (M 6. … Lead Counsel noted that its fee request “adhere[d] precisely to the parameters in the lowest qualified bid proposal” established by the court’s auction. 9 At the hearing on the request to approve the Settlement and for counsel

United States v. Kidada Savage

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 24, 2023

err in finding that African Americans were not underrepresented in the qualified jury wheel, id. at 255-62; (4) the District Court did not clearly err in finding that a preemptory strike by the government was not racially … If all three elements are established, we may, but need not, exercise our discretion to award relief. Id.

Bank of America National Trust and Savings Association, Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. The United States, Defendant/third Party v. Maurice L. Bianchi, Third Party

23 F.3d 380 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 23, 1994

The Court of Federal Claims is established under Article I not Article III. 28 U.S.C. Sec. 171 (a) (Supp. … Sec. 171 ("Such court is hereby declared to be a court established under Article III of Constitution of the United States").

United States v. Hendricks

395 F.3d 173 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 14, 2005

Second, the recorded conversations do not qualify as “testimonial” under any of the three definitions mentioned by the Court. … [It] clearly does not fall within the core category of ex parte testimonial statements that the court was concerned with in Crawford.”). Cf. United States v.

Ridley School District v. M.R.

680 F.3d 260 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 17, 2012

Neither the IDEA, its implementing regulations, nor the applicable Pennsylvania regulations establish a deadline by which children who are suspected of having a qualifying disability must be identified and evaluated. … To establish a violation of § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, Parents were required to prove that (1) E.R. was disabled; (2) she was “otherwise qualified” to participate in school activities; (3) Ridley received federal financial

Martin Rogers v. Willie Bonds

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 28, 2022

Rogers also contends that the District Court made a factual error in its qualified immunity ruling that “precedent does not clearly establish that handcuffing under these circumstances violates the Eighth Amendment.” … We agree with the District Court that no clearly established law put Cisrow and Velez on notice that their conduct was constitutionally violative, and that they were entitled to qualified immunity.

Philadelphia Welfare Rights Organization v. Shapp

602 F.2d 1114 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 9, 1979

The defendants were required to establish, within 60 days, a full statewide program for all eligible children. … The decree established a structure for the implementation of an EPSDT Program. It contained an express waiver of Pennsylvania’s Eleventh Amendment or Pennsylvania law immunity.

Takky Zubeda v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General of the United States

333 F.3d 463 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 23, 2003

Therefore, the Attorney General must withhold deportation if the alien qualifies for relief under INA § 243(h). … However, the Immigration Judge held that Zubeda did qualify for relief under the Convention Against Torture.

Wilson F. Fowle v. C & C Cola

868 F.2d 59 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 16, 1989

The 1978 evaluation found that Fowle was "qualified as a candidate for broader responsibility on the basis of experience and knowledge." … The court stated that "[t]his result is clearly at odds with the mandate of McDonnell Douglas that a plaintiff be afforded a full and fair opportunity to demonstrate that the stated reason for rejection was in fact pretext

Anderson v. Consolidated Rail Corporation Conrail

297 F.3d 242 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 23, 2002

A plaintiff may establish an age discrimination claim using direct or indirect evidence. … In any case, we have stated that "it is clearly proper to instruct the jury that it may consider whether the factual predicates necessary to establish the prima facie case have been shown." Watson v.

William White v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 16, 2026

July 5, 2024) (non- precedential) (ruling, in related case, that White’s PTSD did not qualify as a “physical injury” under § 1997e(e)). … We will therefore affirm the judgment, although, since the bar implicates the government’s sovereign immunity, we will modify the judgment to dismiss the claim. See Blanciak v.

Fuentes v. Reilly

590 F.2d 509 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 9, 1979

We note that the expert was cross-examined at length and that the plaintiff produced rebuttal evidence from her own highly qualified expert. … David Befeler, a well-qualified surgeon, who testified at some length on voir dire out of the jury’s presence.

Mark v. Borough of Hatboro

51 F.3d 1137 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 28, 1995

Thus, "[t]o establish a claim under 42 U.S.C. … immunity under 42 Pa.Cons.Stat.Ann.

Dr. Christine Lentz v. Dr. Kathleen Taylor

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 4, 2021

Liability under Section 1983 is not appropriate if qualified immunity is applicable. “Qualified immunity is intended to shield government officials . . . … ‘from liability from civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” Kopec v.

Hugo Aguilar v. Attorney General United States

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 10, 2024

But qualifying for that type of relief turned out to be an uphill battle given his state court conviction. … Pretrial detention clearly constitutes “confinement.” However, Congress has no less clearly limited the circumstances in which such confinement should bar cancellation of removal.

Detz v. Greiner Ind Inc

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 8, 2003

To establish a prima facie case under the ADEA and the PHRA, Detz asserts that, at the time of his termination, he was qualified for the position he held at Greiner and was capable of continuing to perform it. … On the other hand, in order to establish a prima facie case under the ADEA, a plaintiff must show, among other things, that he was “qualified” for the position he held prior to his termination. See Keller v.

Rolan v. Coleman

680 F.3d 311 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 17, 2012

In doing so, we determine whether the state court’s determinations, (1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined … However, the record clearly indicates that the prosecutor did not comment on Rolan’s post-arrest silence, but rather on the substance and limited nature of what he did say.

Earl Peeples v. James Citta

501 F. App'x 109 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 15, 2012

Although “immunity, whether qualified or absolute, is an affirmative defense which must be affirmatively pleaded,” Kennedy v. … To establish a claim of retaliation, a plaintiff must meet a three-part test.