Case law

United States v. Gathon Shannon

766 F.3d 346 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 8, 2014

Shannon’s counsel clearly objected and said, “Fifth Amendment comment.” … Doyle does not establish a threshold quantity of improper questioning to qualify as a constitutional violation.

United States v. Paul Oscar Pompey

445 F.2d 1313 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 3, 1971

In sum, in order to qualify for a ministerial exemption, the registrant must satisfy the following tripartite test: (1) he must show a regularity of religious preaching and teaching; (2) the ministry must be his main and … Each registrant “bears the burden of clearly establishing” that he has satisfied all the criteria for the exemption and is thus a minister in the statutory sense. Dickinson v.

Martin W. Linden v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad, a Corporation, and Farmers Elevator Mutual Insurance Company, a Corporation, Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad, a Corporation, Third Party v. Holdrege Cooperative Equity Exchange, a Corporation, Third Party

483 F.2d 29 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 15, 1973

We are convinced, however, that in this case the scope of Holdrege's liability has been clearly established as including the injury to Linden "arising out of the . . . maintenance, operation, use" and/or "existence" of the … or use upon the property of the railway company, or by the failure of the licensee or the officers, agents or employees of the licensee to abide by or comply with any of the conditions of this licensee." 2 In Hully, the qualifying

Bao Ying Chen v. Attorney General of United States

307 F. App'x 708 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 22, 2009

To qualify for asylum or withholding of removal, an applicant must establish that she has a well-founded fear that she will be persecuted if removed to her home country on account of race, religion, nationality, membership … to qualify it as an alternative holding, and we will not treat it as such. .

Ernest L. Anderson v. Robert E. Haas, Joseph Wert and the State of New Jersey. Ernest L. Anderson v. Robert E. Haas, Joseph Wert and the State of New Jersey. Robert E. Haas and Joseph Wert

341 F.2d 497 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 12, 1965

constitutional rights, make an independent examination of the facts, the findings, and the record so that it can determine for itself whether in the decision as to reasonableness the fundamental-- i.e., constitutional-- criteria established … N.J.S.A. 2A:170-30 (loitering or creating a disturbance while under the influence of intoxicating liquor), he was convicted and sentenced, but appealed successfully on the ground that his conviction had been based on a clearly

Kaita v. Attorney General of the United States

522 F.3d 288 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 3, 2008

Withholding of Removal In order to qualify for withholding of removal, 7 a petitioner must establish a “clear probability,” that is, that “it is more likely than not” that her life or freedom would be threatened if returned … She never said she “believed” it was the 25th, as the IJ characterized Kai-ta’s testimony; rather she clearly stated that when she was out of pain, she was at the hospital on January 25th.

Joseph A. Mondzelewski, Rebecca Mondzelewski v. Pathmark Stores, Inc., Supermarkets General Corp.

162 F.3d 778 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 23, 1998

We hold that Mondzelewski proffered evidence sufficient to establish for present purposes that the change in his schedule may have altered the “terms, conditions, or privileges” of his employment in violation of 42 U.S.C. … Rodgers, 791 F.2d 439, 442 (5th Cir.1986) (under Title VII, holding district court’s conclusion, i.e., a change to night shift constitutes sufficient evidence of retaliatory job assignment, not clearly erroneous), overruled

United States v. Reginald Harris

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 21, 2019

The Guidelines provide that a defendant may receive a two-level reduction if the defendant “clearly” demonstrates acceptance of responsibility. … Harris does not qualify for the additional one-level decrease because the Government did not so move.

John Keeley Timmie Orange Ariel Kilpatrick Charles Werdann, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Loomis Fargo & Co

183 F.3d 257 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 19, 1999

] to the ‘market for qualified employees.’ ” Id. (quoting district court). … Therefore, abstention under Burford is clearly inappropriate.

Maxus Energy Corp v.

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 9, 2022

An abuse of discretion requires “a clearly erroneous finding of fact, an erroneous legal conclusion, or an improper application of law to fact.” In re Prosser, 777 F.3d 154, 161 (3d Cir. 2015). … Courts must determine, based on the facts of each case, whether a firm’s conflict-of-interest procedures qualify as an effective screen.

Gallimore v. Attorney General of the United States

619 F.3d 216 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 20, 2010

Third, the NTA charged Gallimore as removable under § 1227(a)(2)(B)(i) for having been convicted of a qualifying controlled substance violation. … Gallimore also argues that his removal is now barred by the five-year statute of limitations established in 8 U.S.C. § 1256(a). He did not raise this claim to either the IJ or the BIA.

Frank E. Acierno v. New Castle County

40 F.3d 645 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 10, 1994

Acierno did not establish a non-conforming commercial use within the three-year period provided for in Section 23-6(c), he is no longer entitled to establish any commercial use except those very limited instances where such … Conagra, Inc., 977 F.2d 86, 91-92 (3d Cir.1992) (establishing some remote risk of irreparable harm not enough).

1975 Salaried Retirement Plan for Eligible Employees of Crucible, Inc. v. Nobers

968 F.2d 401 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 6, 1992

Moreover, the Court has also unanimously held that "a federal law need not expressly authorize an injunction of a state court proceeding in order to qualify" under the "expressly authorized" exception. Mitchum v. … The test, rather, is whether an Act of Congress, clearly creating a federal right or remedy enforceable in a federal court of equity, could be given its intended scope only by the stay of a state court proceeding. 34 Id.

Simon v. United States

341 F.3d 193 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 20, 2003

The Federal Tort Claims Act waives sovereign immunity against persons suing the federal government for commission of various torts. … None of these cases, however, establishes that Indiana law embraces depeçage.

Grace Todman v. George Washington Todman

571 F.2d 149 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 10, 1978

This was clearly authorized by 3 V.I. Code Ann. tit. 16, § 109(c) (1964). That option is not open in this case, however. … The district court did not hold that the property at question was the Todmans’ homestead, although presumably the property would qualify.

Jutte v. The George Shiras

61 F. 300 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 4, 1894

And under such circumstances, if an injury occurs, he who is in the charge of the thing injured is within the rale which gives immunity from the effects of such an “act of God,” if he can satisfactorily show that he used … If the cause of the accident to the Hornet is to be relied upon in the attempt to establish a vis major in the case of the Shiras, it must be the same cause, operating at the same time, in the same way, and with the same

Federated Metals Corporation v. United Steelworkers Of America (Afl-Cio)

648 F.2d 856 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 28, 1981

Federated Metals concedes that Nolde established a presumption of postcontract arbitrability. … As a result, the Union contends that the pension claimants have a sufficient number of years of continuous service to qualify for the benefits.

Skenderi v. Attorney General of the United States

357 F. App'x 432 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 17, 2009

Concluding that the IJ’s findings of fact were not clearly erroneous, the BIA affirmed the adverse credibility determination. … Skenderi has not demonstrated that the IJ’s findings of fact were clearly erroneous.

Ratner v. MRC Partnership

156 F.3d 1244 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 3, 1998

Nevertheless, we feel bound to follow the clear precedent established by the New Mexico Supreme Court in Ades. … Damages 39 We review a damage award under the clearly erroneous standard. See Brown v.

In Re: Gen Datacomm

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 16, 2005

DataComm’s position is that the Long Term Care Benefits did not qualify as “retiree benefits” since they were payable during Appellees’ employment. … We, too, express no opinion on this matter, as it has clearly been waived.