Case law

United States v. 68.94 Acres of Land, More or Less, Situate in Kent County, State of Delaware, and Sally A. Dickerson, Trustee

918 F.2d 389 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 31, 1990

To establish an ultimate value for the condemned property, Dickerson planned to call Dr. … Clearly, no decision of this court has interpreted the meaning of “dismissal” to have such fluid contours. C.

National Labor Relations Board v. John Engelhorn & Sons

134 F.2d 553 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 1, 1943

It clearly establishes employer assistance to Local 174 -by means of unfair labor practices. … Since the closed shop agreement of May, 1941, was invalid, the employer cannot claim immunity from liability from consequences of the discharges which were made pursuant to it.

O'Neill v. United States

450 F.2d 1012 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 22, 1971

The “clearly erroneous” test, however, requires that this court be convinced on the whole record that a mistake has been committed. United States v. … That he may no longer be immune to law suits even though he participates in and contributes to the compensation program would be a consideration of great weight to an employer.

Jeffrey Bonkowski v. Oberg Industries Inc

787 F.3d 190 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 22, 2015

he had a qualifying serious medical condition only if he is able to establish he spent the entire ‘night’ as an inpatient at the hospital’ ” and that “an ‘overnight stay’ at a hospital is a stay from sunset on one day to … This obligation clearly encompasses disputes regarding the meaning of federal statutes and federal regulations.

Commissioner v. Scottish American Inv. Co.

142 F.2d 401 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 6, 1944

Thereafter there were various discussions among the three companies as to the establishment of a United States office. On December 2, 1936, they appointed Walter A. … The Tax Board found that the taxpayers established this United States office, in part at least, “to gain certain tax advantages.”

Hanani v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

205 F. App'x 71 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 9, 2006

We apply the test established in Jewett v. Int'l Tel. & Tel. … This is clearly not the law of this circuit. See O’Connor v. City of Newark, 440 F.3d 125, 129 (3d Cir.2006).

Temple University--Of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education v. United States

769 F.2d 126 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 22, 1985

The plaintiff presents several grounds, independent of Rowan, for challenging the rule established in Rev.Rul. 65-208. … The instant case involves payments made to establish a retirement annuity plan of the type described in section 403(b) of the Code.

Sheedy v. City of Philadelphia

184 F. App'x 282 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 22, 2006

The District Court also granted judgment as a matter of law in Detective Holmes’ favor on qualified immunity grounds, vacating the judgment against him. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. … The District Court granted judgment as a matter of law on qualified immunity grounds, and this ruling is the target of Sheedy’s cross-appeal.

Chancellor v. United States

1 F.3d 438 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 2, 1993

Because such duties, although established by military regulations, do not run to the benefit of the employer and are linked only incidentally with the employment relationship, they cannot be said to be discharged within the … Therefore, the United States clearly falls within the definition of "owner" under state law, as does its employee Sergeant Dunlap. 24 (Pls' Brief at 10). 25 We are unpersuaded by plaintiffs' argument that would make the United

Robert D. Barnes v. George W. Chatterton, Regional Appeals Examiner, Director Philadelphia Region, United States Civil Service Commission

515 F.2d 916 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 6, 1975

The record establishes, however, that at the prehearing conference subsequent to the district court decision, the Examiner determined that the documents were not relevant. … Barnes had previously served three years in the Navy during World War II, qualifying as a preference eligible employee. 5 U.S.C. §§ 2108 (3)(A), 7511(1)(1970).

Mellott v. Heemer

161 F.3d 117 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 5, 1998

On appeal, the marshals contend that the district court erred by refusing to grant summary judgment in their favor on grounds of qualified immunity. … The marshals are entitled to qualified immunity if, at the time they acted, they reasonably could have believed that their conduct did not violate the plaintiffs' clearly established constitutional rights.

Campbell v. Burris

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 14, 2008

established federal law within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1). … Delaware case law establishes that the issue of whether the alleged error in the context of this particular case was “apparent on the face of the record”and “so clearly prejudicial to substantial rights as to jeopardize the

Catherine A. MARZANO, Appellant, v. COMPUTER SCIENCE CORP. INC.; CSC Partners Inc.

91 F.3d 497 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 31, 1996

We have held that in order to establish a prima facie ease of this sort, “the plaintiff must show he was in the protected class, he was qualified, he was laid off and other unprotected workers were retained.” … The second and fourth elements, that plaintiff was qualified and that other unprotected workers were retained, establishes that plaintiff was treated differently from his or her colleagues, and introduces a question: Why?

United States v. Jacobs

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 14, 2005

A promise by a law enforcement officer may qualify as coercion. United States v. Walton, 10 F.3d 1024, 1030 (3d Cir. 1993); United States v. Conley, 859 F. Supp. 830, 836 (W.D. Pa. 1994). … Sullivan never made an express promise of immunity.

Newspaper Guild, Erie Newspaper Guild, Local 187 v. National Labor Relations Board

489 F.2d 416 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 30, 1973

In the instant case, most of the Examiner’s opinion is directed toward establishing the first element, supervisory status. … In Wisconsin, unlike the instant case, the union did not appeal the Board’s finding that the supervisors qualified under § 8(b)(1)(B).

Pennsylvania Protection And Advocacy, Inc. v. Pennsylvania Department Of Public Welfare

402 F.3d 374 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 24, 2005

Scope of Budgetary Constraint Analysis 26 Though clearly relevant, budgetary constraints alone are insufficient to establish a fundamental alteration defense. 5 Id. at 495 (explaining that "a singular focus upon a state's … Without such a preliminary showing, an agency cannot establish a fundamental alteration defense. 31 B.

United States v. Richards

674 F.3d 215 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 16, 2012

We conclude that the District Court did not clearly err in finding Richards subject to the enhancement. … Merely pointing out the difference between his sentence and Brace’s sentence does not establish that the District Court clearly erred in concluding that the enhancement should be applied to Richards.

Fredrick Mfg. Co. v. Devlin

127 F. 71 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 1, 1904

question put to the witness as an expert (to which the court had intimated that counsel was entitled), because it assumed, as before, the identity of the borings, which, in the opinion of the court, had not been satisfactorily established … The court is not to be convicted of error at that stage, unless it clearly appears that something both new and material was shut out.

H. Douglas Miller v. Campbell County, Defendants-Third-Party-Plaintiffs/appellees v. United States of America, Third-Party-Defendants

945 F.2d 348 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 24, 1991

In light of our rulings on these issues, infra, we need not address the issue of qualified immunity. 6 . … Here, the district court believed that these pleadings established that the commissioners were confronted with an emergency.

United States v. Warren Troup, D.B.A. Warren Troup Coal Company

821 F.2d 194 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 18, 1987

that the material mined by Troup was combustible and qualified as coal under standards set by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). … Section 1276(a) clearly designates the United States District Court for the District of Columbia as the forum for challenging national regulations promulgated by the Secretary.