Case law

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Midtown Medical Center, Inc.

388 F. App'x 125 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 19, 2010

Pennsylvania law is clear that “if only one spouse is a debtor, entireties property is immune from process, petition, levy, execution or sale.” Klebach v. … Restatement (First) of Restitution § 207 (1937); see also id. § 162. 5 The Restate *131 ment clearly distinguishes between a wrongdoer who uses ill-gotten funds to acquire the property (thus entitling the trustee to a constructive

Painters Of Philadelphia District Council No. 21 Welfare Fund v. Price Waterhouse

879 F.2d 1146 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 15, 1989

Sec. 1002 (21)(A). 11 Since Price Waterhouse clearly did not have authority or responsibility respecting management of the Fund or control over the disposition of its assets and did not provide investment advice for a fee … The opinion by the independent qualified public accountant shall be made part of the annual report.... 14 29 U.S.C.

United States v. Reginelli

133 F.2d 595 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 25, 1943

The following facts were established by direct proof. … In the light of this instruction, the jury’s verdict clearly implied their finding that the credible evidence established the defendant’s immoral purpose, and no lawful purpose, in having the woman transported in interstate

Kevin Kelly v. RealPage Inc

47 F.4th 202 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 24, 2022

To establish standing, a plaintiff—whether acting in her individual capacity or as a putative class representative—bears the burden of establishing: “(1) an injury-in-fact; (2) that is fairly traceable to the defendant’s … But, as we qualified in Byrd v.

Tressler v. Heckler

748 F.2d 146 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 14, 1984

We hold that Tressler is clearly a “prevailing party”; the court awarded Tressler all the relief that he requested. See Natural Resources Defense Council v. U.S.E.P.A., 703 F.2d 700 , 704 n. 5 (3d Cir. 1983). … (Memorandum and Order, App. 23); a better interpretation would require that “EAJA provides for mandatory award of counsel fees to a qualified prevailing party.” National Resources Defense Council, 703 F.2d at 704 .

Batsaihan Purveegiin v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General of the United States Michael Chertoff, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security

448 F.3d 684 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 1, 2006

review a decision by an immigration judge or the Service that is not in conformity with the law or with applicable precedents; (iv) The need to resolve a case or controversy of major national import; (v) The need to review a clearly … A Board member’s determination that a case qualified for three-member review under paragraph (e)(6) would have no bearing on his or her ultimate authority to resolve the appeal.

Jody Lutter v. Jneso

86 F.4th 111 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 6, 2023

Comm’rs of Emigration, 113 U.S. 33, 39 (1885))).5 They require genuine upheld due to Eleventh Amendment immunity. … Arizona, 520 U.S. 43, 67 (1997) (“To qualify as a case fit for federal-court adjudication, ‘an actual controversy must be extant at all stages of review, not merely at the time the complaint is filed.’”

Chalmers v. Shalala

23 F.3d 752 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 24, 1994

Congress clearly intended that such “buildings or land” “must be disposed of” if they were “not readily convertible to cash.” … Although we are sympathetic to Chal-mers’s disability, the record does not establish unequivocally that she cannot effectuate her legal rights.

Beazer East Inc v. Mead Corp

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 13, 2008

[an administrative order under § 106] would qualify as a ‘civil action.’” 543 U.S. at 168 n.5. Beazer argues that the RCRA order is the functional equivalent of one under CERCLA and would qualify as a “civil action.” … Mead’s liability under § 113(f)(1) was established by the time of the District Court’s orders in 2002 – well before this Court’s June 23, 2005, opinion in Beazer II.

Elsayed v. Attorney General

366 F. App'x 340 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 17, 2010

Both the IJ and BIA clearly articulated the proper “clear probability” or “more likely than not” standard. R. at 3,107. See Kaita v. … Att’y Gen. of the United States, 522 F.3d 288, 296 (3d Cir. 2008) (explaining that “[i]n order to qualify for withholding of removal, a petitioner must establish a ‘clear probability,’ that is, that ‘it is more likely than

Sowell v. Butcher & Singer, Inc.

926 F.2d 289 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 21, 1991

He's not qualified to exclude members of the class, he's not qualified to include members of the class. … The opinions and inferences which Sowell drew from IGE transfer records were clearly based on more than his own perceptions.

Ever Serrano-Alberto v. Attorney General United States

859 F.3d 208 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 12, 2017

In its opinion, the BIA assumed, without deciding, that Serrano- Alberto had established membership in a PSG and/or had 21 established an imputed anti-gang political opinion, but held that … Just as the Supreme Court has observed in the qualified immunity context, adjudication at every step is generally “necessary to support the Constitution’s ‘elaboration from case to case’ and to prevent constitutional stagnation

Elsayed v. Attorney General

366 F. App'x 340 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 17, 2010

Both the IJ and BIA clearly articulated the proper “clear probability” or “more likely than not” standard. R. at 3,107. See Kaita v. … Att’y Gen. of the United States, 522 F.3d 288, 296 (3d Cir. 2008) (explaining that “[i]n order to qualify for withholding of removal, a petitioner must establish a ‘clear probability,’ that is, that ‘it is more likely than

Ezeagwuna v. Atty Gen USA

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 30, 2002

extraordinary, and would clearly substantiate the respondent’s claim. … The burden is on the applicant to establish that she qualifies as a refugee under the statute. 8 C.F.R. S 208.13(a); see Balasubramanrim, 143 F.3d at 161.

Berne v. Continental Insurance

753 F.2d 27 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 22, 1985

Thus the trial court’s finding that the discharge of the pistol did not arise out of operations necessary or incidental to the business of Berne’s Ice Company, Inc. is not clearly erroneous. Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a). … Since the court’s findings of fact establish that the Continental policy does not apply, the declaratory judgment in favor of Continental will be affirmed.

Ruth M. Noel and William H. Frantz, Executors of the Estate of Marshal L. Noel, Deceased, in No. 14727 v. United Aircraft Corporation, in No. 14730

342 F.2d 232 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 15, 1965

Respondent contends that the evidence does not support the court’s findings as to causation and further urges that (1) Grindle was not qualified to testify as an expert; and (2) it was error to credit Captain Fisher’s version … Noel five years 27 to establish his Venezuelan business on a profitable basis and at the same time to extricate himself from his financial difficulties in Texas.

Richard Warner v. Catherine McVey

429 F. App'x 176 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 27, 2011

He limits his challenge to the District Court‟s determination that defendants Lightner and Williams were entitled to qualified immunity. … Even if we assume that our reasoning recognizes a clearly established right for a probationer such as Warner, this right was not clearly established when Warner‟s designation was applied. See Torisky v.

United States v. Arrelucea-Zamudio

581 F.3d 142 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 14, 2009

The Court rejected this argument and allowed certified copies of Arrelucea’s prior convictions to establish his eligibility for an enhancement. … The qualifying defendant pleads guilty to one or both of these lesser charges, and thus alters the Guidelines range calculation at step 1.

Trio Process Corporation and Franklin Smelting & Refining Co., a Partnership v. L. Goldstein's Sons, Inc. And Metal Bank, Inc.

612 F.2d 1353 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 2, 1980

In a frequently cited Opinion, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York lists several factors to be considered in establishing a reasonable royalty. … that should be credited to the invention as distinguished from non-patented elements, the manufacturing process, business risks, or significant features or improvements added by the infringer. [8] The opinion testimony of qualified

Delaware Department of Natural Resources & Environmental Control v. United States Army Corps of Engineers

685 F.3d 259 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 3, 2012

The deepening project unquestionably qualifies, as Congress clearly authorized it in the Water Resources Development Act of 1992, Pub. L. … Finally, the canon that “[w]aivers of immunity must be construed strictly in favor of the sovereign,” see U.S. Dep’t of Energy v.