Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
9,730 results
0.95s
861 F.2d 1211 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 21, 1988
"The discretion belongs to Congress, unless the choice is clearly wrong, a display of arbitrary power, not an exercise of judgment." Id. … The Oklahoma Constitution provides in article 5, section 51 that 26 [t]he Legislature shall pass no law granting to any association, corporation, or individual any exclusive rights, privileges, or immunities with this State
Cited 0 timesPublishedBell Atl PA v. PA Pub Util Comm
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 7, 2001
See, e.g., Puerto Rico Aqueduct, 506 U.S. at 144 (state sovereign immunity immediately appealable); Mitchell, 472 U.S. at 526 (qualified executive immunity immediately appealable); Larsen v. … Unlike qualified immunity or Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity, claim preclusion is not based on a right to be free from all 11 the costs and burdens of having to be a party to a case
Cited 0 timesUnknownUnited States v. 47 Bottles, More or Less
320 F.2d 564 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 16, 1963
To meet this burden, the testimony of nine expert and highly qualified witnesses was presented. … The various symbols are indicated as follows: "MDR — Minimum Daily Requirement"; "‡ † Need established. MDR not established.
Cited 9 timesPublishedBoy Scouts of America and Delaware BSA LLC v.
137 F.4th 126 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 13, 2025
Therefore, where an appellant can demonstrate that a bankruptcy court erroneously concluded that the record facts are sufficient to establish good faith, or those factual findings are clearly erroneous, § 363(m) poses no … But does that movement qualify as “disposing of or parting with” the property?
Cited 17 timesPublishedAmato v. Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General
183 F. App'x 260 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 8, 2006
Agent Waugaman filed a motion to dismiss contending that probable cause to arrest existed and that he was entitled to qualified immunity. … In the alternative, the district court held that Special Agent Waugaman was entitled to qualified immunity. II.
Cited 1 timesUnpublishedSyblis v. Attorney General of the United States
763 F.3d 348 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 18, 2014
That is clearly not the case here. … 147 (because the record was silent as to whether the noncitizen sold or exchanged marijuana, court could not definitively conclude that his conviction for criminal sale of marijuana constituted drug trafficking crime that qualified
Cited 28 timesPublishedJose Aristy-Rosa v. Attorney General United States of America
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 14, 2026
Therefore, counsel’s briefs lacked evidence and fell far short of establishing irreparable harm. C. … These matters are so “exclusively entrusted to the political branches of government as to be largely immune from judicial inquiry or interference.” Id. at 589.
Cited 0 timesPublishedLong Hao Li v. Attorney General of the United States
633 F.3d 136 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 1, 2011
An assessment of a sentence or hard work or labor for such a violation clearly offends the analysis of the Court.” A.R. 85. … “As a general matter, ... we have held that fear of prosecution for violations of ‘fairly administered laws’ does not itself qualify one as a ‘refugee’ or make one eligible for withholding of [removal].” Chang v.
Cited 32 timesPublishedMorrissey v. Luzerne County Community College
117 F. App'x 809 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 19, 2004
Clearly, then, President Larson’s decision to re- institute a new search did not run afoul of established hiring procedures. … immunity (raised by LCCC) and punitive damages (raised by Morrissey).
Cited 9 timesUnpublishedCleopatra McDougal v. Alexis M. Herman, Secretary, U.S. Department of Labor
161 F.3d 198 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 17, 1998
See also 20 C.F.R. § 10.408 which mirrors this statutory language but adds the requirement that the third physician be qualified in the appropriate specialty. … Even though for the purposes of its opinion the ECAB chose not to treat this as a “disagreement” between the two physicians, it was clearly a “disagreement” within the plain meaning of § 8123(a).
Cited 2 timesPublishedEmil Jutrowski v. Township of Riverdale
904 F.3d 280 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 12, 2018
A district court abuses its discretion if its decision not to draw the inference rests upon “a clearly erroneous finding of fact, an errant conclusion of law or an improper application of law to fact.” Meditz v. … Despite the “acceptable reasons” for the officers to clear the search area which risked “effectively immunizing officers from property-damage claims by preventing a plaintiff from observing the person responsible for the
Cited 1,051 timesPublishedPhiladelphia Record Co. v. Manufacturing Photo-Engravers Ass'n of Philadelphia
155 F.2d 799 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 17, 1946
The evidence clearly supports the finding of the Trial Judge that there was a combination between the union and the association to prevent the plaintiff from producing photo-engraving products at night. … The District Court held, “I do not think this change of attitude of the association renders the union immune from the law of the Allen Bradley case.” That holding was obviously correct.
Cited 16 timesPublished601 F.2d 1269 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 10, 1979
Testimony by Major Homer Redd of the Pennsylvania State Police established that there were 260 incidents of trucking violence on Pennsylvania highways during the first month of the shutdown, including rock-throwing, shootings … United States, 371 U.S. 94, 99-100 , 83 S.Ct. 162 , 9 L.Ed.2d 150 (1962) (footnotes omitted). 33 Immunity from the strictures of the injunction for Special Haulers who had collective bargaining agreements could properly have
Cited 15 timesPublishedHalderman v. Pennhurst State School & Hospital
673 F.2d 647 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 26, 1982
There is no suggestion in the Schmidt opinion that this order would be qualified by the necessity for appropriations. … Thus a dismissal of the complaint would clearly have been inappropriate. As to abstention under Railroad Comm’n of Texas v.
Reversed on other grounds by Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89 (1984)Cited 13 timesPublished122 F.3d 885 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 16, 1997
The district court dismissed the underlying § 1983 action on Younger abstention and Eleventh Amendment immunity grounds. … Harris, 401 U.S. 37 , 91 S.Ct. 746 , 27 L.Ed.2d 669 (1971), because the plaintiffs failed to establish that this case fell within the bad faith and harassment exception to that abstention doctrine.
Cited 1 timesPublished381 F.3d 281 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 26, 2004
, and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's failure to do so was contrary to clearly established federal law. … III. 199 For these reasons, I conclude that Hackett has established a Mills error, and that the state court's rejection of this claim resulted in an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law.
Cited 0 timesPublished609 F.2d 695 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 14, 1979
Beal until such time as a timely and adequate notice is given — i. e., for at least a ten day period. 6 On cross motions for summary judgment, based upon a stipulation of facts, the district court held that DPW had “clearly … In order to qualify for funding under Title XIX, a state must provide at least five basic services to individuals who meet various income requirements. 42 U.S.C. § 1396a(a)(10)(A), (a)(13)(B).
Cited 23 timesPublishedCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 3, 2006
However, Becotte clearly expressed that Stewart’s medication regimen was crucial to his stability. … On appeal, Stewart argues that the District Court committed clear error because the evidence he presented at the hearing clearly and convincingly established that his release would not create a substantial risk of bodily
Cited 0 timesPublishedRamin Rejaie v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
691 F.2d 139 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 17, 1982
The Supreme Court has observed that motions under § 3.8 “will not be granted ‘when a prima facie case of eligibility for the relief sought has not been established.’ ” INS v. … Rather, in his brief he simply summarizes the factual content of his motion without explaining which, if any, of the narrated events, substantiated or otherwise, occurred after the deportation hearing and thus qualify as
Cited 39 timesPublished
Ask Donna