Case law

United States v. Armocida

515 F.2d 29 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 23, 1975

Greene's affidavit clearly meets these two requirements. … By this standard, Greene's affidavit is clearly sufficient to support the finding made by the court. B.

Geraghty v. United States Parole Commission

579 F.2d 238 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 9, 1978

Westinghouse, 53 if mooting of a named plaintiff's claim bars review of a denial of class certification, our rule against interlocutory appeals of class certification orders will, in a significant number of cases, effectively immunize … As part of a legislative overhaul of the parole system, the 1976 Act granted the newly-established Parole Commission the power and the duty to: 75 promulgate rules and regulations establishing guidelines for the power (to

United States v. Schiff

602 F.3d 152 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 7, 2010

It contends that Oran did not create an exhaustive list of duties in the securities context, and that this fiduciary duty qualifies as a fourth circumstance. This argument reaches too far. … state regulation,” and “[a]bsent a clear indication of congressional intent, we are reluctant to federalize the substantial portion of the law of corporations that deals with transactions in securities, particularly where established

Marcella v. Brandywine Hospital

47 F.3d 618 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 15, 1995

It may be seen that decisional law establishes that the “sue and be sued” clause, without more, does not resolve the question before us. … Clearly, the Service retained some of the attributes it held earlier as an undoubted part of government. The ban against jury trials of personal injury suits is such an instance.

Kermit Demette v. Falcon Drilling Company, Inc., R & B Falcon Drilling Usa, Inc., Defendant-Third Party v. Frank's Casing Crew & Rental Tools, Inc., Third Party

253 F.3d 840 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 12, 2001

Once it inserts the qualifier "other than a ship or vessel"; once it does not. … But we disagree that en banc reversal of established circuit precedent is in order.

United States v. Murphy

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 19, 2003

This is because Panarella and Antico address the different issue of what types of fiduciary duties are required, within the meaning of honest services, when either state or federal law already clearly establishes a fiduciary … Here, in contrast, the Government cannot identify any clearly established fiduciary relationship or legal duty in either federal or state law between Murphy and Passaic County or its citizens.

Wheeler v. Hampton Township

399 F.3d 238 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 24, 2005

The Township did not deny that the CBA established the overtime calculation described by the Officers. … The Township does not qualify for the credit allowed under § 207(h)(2) because it does not claim to have provided in the CBA extra pay for hours worked. See 29 U.S.C. § 207(e)(5)-(7).

Avco Delta Corporation Canada Limited v. United States v. Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America, Third Party Defendants-Counterclaimants v. Canadian Parkhill Pipe Stringing, Ltd., Counter

540 F.2d 258 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 23, 1976

The first instance arose from the suit of Avco Delta against the United States and the Parkhill companies in an endeavor to establish priority of the mortgagee's claim over that of the Government. … We will have to have it demonstrated to us, however, that if competent counsel (and there has been no indication in the present case that the Parkhill companies' counsel was otherwise than well qualified) participates in

North American Coal Company v. William C. Miller, and Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor

870 F.2d 948 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 28, 1989

Klemens’ physical examination revealed no significant abnormalities and the pulmonary function tests were non-qualifying.” However, “Dr. … Altose’s report is clearly not redundant since Dr. Van Ordstrand’s report critiqued not the 1986 report of Dr. Klemens but rather his 1982 reports. Nor did Dr.

Sikkelee Ex Rel. Estate of Sikkelee v. Precision Airmotive Corp.

822 F.3d 680 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 19, 2016

No. 85-2360, at 16 (1958), which clearly did not preempt state law products liability claims, see supra, Part III.B. … The Seventh Circuit has clearly indicated its understanding that state law applies to aviation products liability claims.

American Bonding Co. v. United States

233 F. 364 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 16, 1916

Clearly, therefore, the Department adopted August 2, 1913, as the date of final settlement, and so informed the subcontractors— among them, the firm by whom the suit was begun on February 4. … This rule is familiar, but of recent years the courts have qualified its application to companies that make a business of guaranty insurance.

Sarmiento v. Montclair State University

285 F. App'x 905 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 3, 2008

The District Court dismissed those claims in 2005 on the basis of sovereign immunity, and Sarmiento does not challenge those rulings on appeal. 2 Sarmiento moved for reconsideration in the District Court after filing … Under that framework, a plaintiff challenging a hiring decision has the initial burden of establishing a prima facie case of discrimination. See id. at 802.

Ray Huber v. Casablanca Industries, Inc.

916 F.2d 85 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 22, 1990

It clearly provided for interest in other sections of MPPAA.... … The statute clearly contemplates a single schedule of interim payments.

Philadelphia & R. R. v. Smith

64 F. 679 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 26, 1894

It is, however, contended that it has been departed from, or materially qualified, in this country, and especially in the state of New Jersey, where the subject-matter of this controversy is situated. … There must be assent to the wrong, and to establish this there must be evidence of active participation in the wrong.

In re Federal-Mogul Global, Inc.

300 F.3d 368 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 31, 2002

Pacor clearly remains good law in this circuit. 8 Under our operating procedures, we cannot revisit Pacor unless we are sitting en banc. … Hermansdorfer, 423 U.S. 336, 345-46 , 96 S.Ct. 584 , 46 L.Ed.2d 542 (1976), that only remand orders based on grounds specified in § 1447(c) are immune from review under § 1447(d).

Consolidation Coal Company v. Kramer

305 F.3d 203 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 24, 2002

In addition, as the Board also noted, the unequivocal opinions of Wecht and Reilly, on which the ALJ relied, explained clearly how pneumoconiohastened the miner's death. 16 Where the ALJ has discussed the qualifications of … Competent evidence for the Claimant tends to establish that pulmonary burden from occupational pneumoconiosis hastened her husband's death from cancer.

Phelps v. Belger Cartage Service, Inc.

66 F.3d 326 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 20, 1995

Findings of fact may not be set aside unless clearly erroneous. Rule 52(a) Fed.R.Civ.P. … 18 "We assert," the plaintiffs argue, "that such permit did not constitute a grant of immunity from vehicular operational negligence, although it would have granted immunity from a citation for being oversized." 19 The immunization

Sarauw v. Oceanic Navigation Corporation Vlcc

622 F.2d 1168 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 20, 1980

Sarauw's appeal, though, is, as Oceanic concedes, clearly meritorious on the basis of Edmonds v. … The standard for vessel liability given in the jury instructions in this case was a more qualified one than that enunciated in Griffith of " 'reasonable care under the circumstances.' " 610 F.2d at 125 . 32 2.

Amilcar Francisco-Lopez v. Attorney General USA

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 13, 2020

This factor favors Francisco because his case clearly did not present a question of first impression. … This indicates that the BIA intended to and did make an “abrupt departure from well established practice.” Allegheny Ludlum, 301 F.3d at 180.

Ever Bedoya v. American Eagle Express Inc

914 F.3d 812 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 29, 2019

Judgment will not be granted unless the movant “clearly establishes there are no material issues of fact, and he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Sikirica v. Nationwide Ins. … Where a company successfully demonstrates all three elements with respect to a worker, that worker qualifies as an independent contractor under the NJWHL and NJWPL. Hargrove v.