Case law

CSX Transportation Co. v. Novolog Bucks County

502 F.3d 247 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 14, 2007

We take as our starting point two well-established and oft-repeated principles. … establish or refer to an agency relationship,” the agency relationship is considered disclosed.) 13 .

William B. Leavens, Jr. And Emeline P. Leavens, in No. 71-1675. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue. Robert Glass and Mae C. Glass, in No. 71-1677 v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue. John Last and Marie Last, in No. 71-1678 v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

467 F.2d 809 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 22, 1972

We disagree and reverse. 3 All of the taxpayers in this case are either officers of the Wilkata Folding Box Company or their wives. 1 On July 24, 1950, Wilkata established a profitsharing trust for its employees. … case should therefore have considered the effect of the waiver agreements on the ability of the appellants to gain control over their shares in the fund. 23 Such an assessment would have found that these waiver agreements clearly

Gray v. York Newspapers, Inc.

957 F.2d 1070 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 19, 1992

qualified for the position; (3) was dismissed despite being qualified; and (4) ultimately was replaced by a person sufficiently younger to permit an inference of age discrimination. … In that case, the employee was clearly demoted in an employment decision which the jury found was based on her age.

William Conover v. Meril Main

601 F. App'x 112 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 25, 2015

We will reverse a state court’s determination of a claim on the merits only if it “resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law” or “resulted … Conover first challenges the state courts’ denial of his ex post facto and double- jeopardy claims as contrary to clearly established federal law.

Frederick E. Lewis v. American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Afl-Cio

407 F.2d 1185 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 25, 1969

and set aside agency action, findings, and conclusions found to be— (A) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (B) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity … Early committee prints in the Senate provided *1191 for review by ‘weight of the evidence’ or ‘clearly erroneous’ standards.

Brown v. Daniels

290 F. App'x 467 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 22, 2008

On Appellees’ motion, the District Court dismissed the action for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, and in the alternative, held that Appellees were entitled to qualified immunity. … The transcript from the July 9, 2003 Juvenile Court hearing clearly indicates that the court ordered that Dr. Baker’s report be made available to the guardian and the agency.

United States v. Olga Gaydos

108 F.3d 505 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 14, 1997

Gaydos concedes that Russell clearly stands for the proposition that renting real estate is an activity which affects interstate commerce within the meaning' of § 844(i). … First, the record clearly demonstrates that all tenants had vacated the house. Indeed, the property was unfit for human habitation.

Island Development Co. v. McGeorge

26 F.2d 841 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 23, 1928

That they were not admissible as evidence of title is clearly established by decisions of the Supreme Court and the Court of Errors and Appeals of New Jersey in Troth v. Smith, 68 N. J. … proceedings as a source of title (without distinguishing between the two titles) but' we gravely doubt whether the jury, after the first bold instruction had found lodgment in their minds, regarded the later instruction as qualifying

United States v. Contant

467 F. App'x 141 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 26, 2012

The claim is clearly without merit. … Thus, he can not be considered a “qualified alien” pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1641(c)(1)(B), and he can not avail himself of the automatic stay in 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(iv).

Kruzits v. Okuma MacHine Tool, Inc.

40 F.3d 52 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 15, 1994

Under Rule 12(c), we will not grant judgment on the pleadings “unless the movant clearly establishes that no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Id. … The courts look to see if the indemnity clause specifically and clearly provides for indemnification against the particular underlying claims. Sorrentino, 3 Ill.Dec. 559 , 358 N.E.2d 1244 ; Westinghouse Elec.

Sarango v. Attorney General of United States

651 F.3d 380 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 30, 2011

Dec. 833, 842 (B.I.A. 1999) (“We conclude that Congress‟ decision to require a specific determination by the Secretary of State, based on foreign policy interests, to establish deportability . . . coupled with division of … Dec. at 371 (“[A]liens who are inadmissible under section 212(a)(9)(C)(i)(I) of the Act cannot qualify for section 245(i) adjustment, absent a waiver of inadmissibility.”).

Paige Lesher v. Clark Zimmerman

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 10, 2020

Department of Social Services of City of New York. 2 In opposition, Zimmerman contends that Lesher failed to adequately plead a state- created danger claim and therefore, he is entitled to qualified immunity. … Dist., 239 F.3d 246, 252 (2d Cir. 2001) (finding no qualified immunity where gym teacher picked up student by his throat and rammed his head into bleachers and a fuse box). 15 City of Canton v.

Kanivets v. Atty Gen USA

424 F.3d 330 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 7, 2005

Based on this weakness in the petitioner’s case, the IJ determined that Kanivets had failed to establish (1) that he qualified as a refugee, (2) that he was entitled to withholding of removal and (3) that he faced a clear … That case, however, is clearly distinguishable because the motion to remand was filed after the period of voluntary departure had expired. See Bhiski, 373 F.3d at 366. Reynoso-Lopez v.

BA Properties Inc. v. Government of the United States Virgin Islands

299 F.3d 207 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 29, 2002

BA also argued before the Territorial Court and the Appellate Division that it qualified for an exemption from the Stamp Tax under 33 V.I.C. … Does the Statutory Language of S 128(a)(2) Clearly Exempt the Present Transaction from Taxation?

Zubik v. Zubik

384 F.2d 267 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 29, 1967

Plaintiffs have “the burden of establishing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the corporation was an artifice and a sham designed to execute illegitimate purposes in abuse of the corporate fiction and the immunity … But such “privity” cannot, without more, satisfy the libellants’ burden of establishing Charles, Sr.’s individual liability for negligence.

Patria Laureano v. Attorney General United States of America

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 29, 2026

Holder, 712 F.3d 1338, 1345 (9th Cir. 2013) (holding that “Congress has clearly expressed its intent: the overall structure of the INA compels the conclusion that Section 1231(b)(3)(B)(iv) establishes but one category of … ‘per se’ [PSC]s, and requires the agency to conduct a case-by-case analysis of convictions falling outside the category established by Congress”); N-A- M- v.

Ronald Alexander Faye Alexander Fair Housing Partnership of Greater Pittsburgh, Inc., in No. 98-3597 v. Joseph Riga Maria A. Riga A/K/A Carla Agnotti Ronald Alexander Faye Alexander Fair Housing Partnership of Greater Pittsburgh, Inc. v. Joseph Riga Maria A. Riga A/K/A Carla Agnotti

208 F.3d 419 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 22, 2000

Generally, a party who does not clearly and specifically object to a charge he believes to be erroneous waives the issue on appeal. … Though the Rigas maintain that the Alexanders had to show that they were fully qualified to rent the apartment ultimately, the Alexanders only needed to show that they were qualified to be applicants, to view the apartment

West v. Bowen

879 F.2d 1122 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 11, 1989

members with a meaningful opportunity to establish their entitlement." … Clearly, the statutory process invoked by Sec. 2012(r) survives such a review.

Heffner v. Union National Bank & Trust Co.

639 F.2d 1011 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 29, 1981

The district court’s finding as to the shareholders’ intent was not clearly erroneous. … Finally, we note that as a result of our decision, the Board will consist of the holdover directors from the 1979 Board who are still qualified directors and Ms.

Miguel Perez v. Camden County Municipal Court

714 F. App'x 134 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 25, 2017

Camden argues that this Court nevertheless has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and the collateral order doctrine established in Cohen v. … Just as municipalities cannot assert qualified immunity defenses as a means of gaining review of adverse denials of summary judgment, neither can Camden assert a judicial immunity defense to appeal this District Court