Case law

Charles Crissman Wendy Crissman Christine Crissman v. Dover Downs Entertainment Inc. Dover Downs, Inc

239 F.3d 357 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 25, 2001

It provides that when the state has not clearly directed the private act of discrimination, but it “has so far insinuated itself into a position of inter dependence” with the private actor, the state “must be recognized as … For all of the reasons discussed above, the Crissmans have established that a symbiotic relationship exists between Delaware and Dover Downs.

Sikora v. American Can Co.

622 F.2d 1116 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 31, 1980

Although the precise category of cases to which the “manifest injustice” exception applies has not been clearly defined, the Bradley opinion commented that “the Court in Schooner Peggy suggested that such injustice could … The Supreme Court held in McMann that a plan established before passage of the Act in 1967 was not a subterfuge.

Wells Fargo v. Bear Stearns Co Inc

945 F.3d 801 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 24, 2019

Finding that the Bankruptcy Court’s good faith determination was one of historical fact and not clearly erroneous, the District Court upheld the judgment. … Moreover, whether an exchange of funds occurred is immaterial to establishing the securities’ fair market value.17 HomeBanc also asserts that Bear Stearns acted in bad faith because it knew or should have known that

Patricia Lee v. Jane Gallina Mecca

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 8, 2023

and judicial immunity. … Lee’s allegations and requests for relief are counter to our Eleventh Amendment jurisprudence, which clearly bars “relief that essentially serves to 18 Verizon Md., Inc. v. Pub. Serv.

In Re: Niaspan Antitrust Litigation v.

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 4, 2023

That finding is not clearly erroneous. 2. … Supp. 3d at 166-67, and, again, that finding is not clearly erroneous.

In Re New Jersey Title Insurance Litigation

683 F.3d 451 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 14, 2012

Thus, Appellants are correct that their action does not clearly impact the doctrine’s nondiscrimination strand. … Thus, Appellants must establish standing based on the possibility of future unfair rates. See Phillip E.

Freedom From Religion Foundation Inc. v. New Kensington Arnold School District

832 F.3d 469 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 9, 2016

Thus, the federal courts would need to adjudicate the merits of this alleged Establishment Clause violation. … Schaub clearly has standing to seek injunc-tive and declaratory relief. I question the need to conduct a separate standing analysis for nominal damages.

Lindsey Coal Mining Company v. Chater

90 F.3d 688 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 3, 1996

Moreover, even on the guidelines' own terms, Lindsey cannot establish that it is not "in business." … Although the guidelines exempt liquidating trusts from the "in business" definition, Lindsey does not appear to qualify as a liquidating trust.

United States v. William S. Polan, George H. Wehner, Sr., William S. Polan

970 F.2d 1280 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 29, 1992

It has long been established, however, that an indictment need not negative a statutory exception. In McKelvey v. … Prior decisions of this court have held that the Constitution provides qualified protection for medical records sought by search warrant or subpoena.

Benezet Consulting LLC v. Secretary Commonwealth of PA

26 F.4th 580 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 24, 2022

“A district court abuses its discretion if its decision rests on an incorrect legal standard, a clearly erroneous factual finding, or a misapplication of the law to the facts.” TD Bank N.A. v. … A well-established exception to the mootness doctrine holds that we have jurisdiction to decide technically moot cases which are “capable of repetition, yet evading review.” Rendell v.

University Of West Virginia, Board Of Trustees v. Vanvoorhies

278 F.3d 1288 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 30, 2002

Patent 5,361,737, to WVU without objection. 32 The evidence is also clearly contrary to VanVoorhies' assertion that he was not affiliated with WVU and thus not subject to its patent policy when he conceived his second invention … Samsung Electronics Co., 204 F.3d at 1380 , 54 USPQ2d at 1009, that "inequitable conduct before the PTO cannot qualify as an act of mail fraud or wire fraud for purposes of the predicate act requirement."

Si Handling Systems, Inc. v. Heisley

753 F.2d 1244 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 27, 1985

Dentner proposed that Midwest establish a temporary office in Easton with the following "charter": 30 1.) Basic Concepts & Designs of Robotrac Components. 31 a.) … This finding is not clearly erroneous. 80 Knowledge of long lead times in component supply.

United States v. Alex Mussayek, A/K/A Tsion Mussayek, A/K/A Alexander Mussayel, A/K/A Alexander Mussyev Tsion "Alex" Mussayev

338 F.3d 245 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 8, 2003

He settled in Brooklyn with his family, and established himself as owner of a small flower and candy business. … Similarly, Application Note 6 of § 2B3.1 is clearly distinguishable.

JS Ex Rel. Snyder v. Blue Mountain School Dist.

650 F.3d 915 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 13, 2011

The policies clearly define when and where they apply. Further, the content of the regulations is not impermissibly vague. … Instead, it was implemented despite the fact that these policies quite clearly did not extend to the conduct at issue.

Metro Transportation Co. v. North Star Reinsurance Co.

912 F.2d 672 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 30, 1990

The court should clearly articulate the reasons and factors underlying its decision to grant 54(b) certification. “... … recognized as such by the legislature, such as any common carrier that has the resources to qualify as “self-insured.”

United States v. Williams

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 18, 2003

Background The facts established at trial, taken in the light most favorable to the Government, are straightforward. … In light of the broad reading afforded to § 924(c) by the courts, the requirements of the “in relation to” clause are clearly satisfied in this case.

Joseph v. Hess Oil Virgin Islands Corp.

651 F.3d 348 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 5, 2011

P. 26] when a party shows that disclosure will result in a clearly defined, specific and serious injury but that broad allegations of harm are not sufficient to establish good cause”); MCI Telecomms. Corp. v. … Further, while the “additional justification” of the death of counsel’s father “would in some circumstances qualify as ‘good cause shown,’” id., counsel in question had not been working on the petition and “prevented by the

United States v. Donovan

661 F.3d 174 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 31, 2011

Donovan also stated that “[i]n periods of heavy rainfall, when there is water flowing on my Property, the rainwater channels are clearly defined and easy to differentiate from the neighboring land.” JA 641. … Donovan does not argue that the filler material he used on his land does not qualify as a pollutant under the CWA. 8 waters, their tributaries, and wetlands which are adjacent to any of

Elfido Gonzalez Castillo v. Attorney General United States of America

109 F.4th 127 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 24, 2024

Att’y Gen., 12 F.4th 262, 277-78 (3d Cir. 2021) (holding that noncitizens who were naturalized citizens at the time of their conviction are immune from removal under § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii)); Hylton v. … We are not clearly authorized to assert such powers, but Congress is clearly authorized to confer them upon us, so I fear that we may be “aggrandizing . . . power at the expense of another branch.” Freytag v.

Franklin Music Co. v. American Broadcasting Companies

616 F.2d 528 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 21, 1979

for itself the services of highly qualified employees. … Clearly, then, there was an evidentiary basis upon which an estimate of lost profits could have been made.