Case law

Ningsih v. Attorney General of the United States

227 F. App'x 115 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 11, 2007

To qualify for protection under CAT, the applicant must “establish that it is more likely than not that he or she would be tortured if removed to the proposed country of 5 … As such, the IJ’s finding is clearly based on specific, cogent reasons in the record. See Dia, 353 F.3d at 250.

Joy Manufacturing Company v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

230 F.2d 740 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 29, 1956

As already pointed out the general agreement to capitalize the engineering and service fee claims was qualified by a provision that token payments in money would be considered proper. … Ct. 177 , 94 L.Ed. 150 . 28 Far from establishing that the Tax Court's finding was "clearly erroneous" the record on the contrary amply supports it. 29 Article Fourth of the written "basic" contract between the taxpayer and

Mattie Halley v. Honeywell International Inc

861 F.3d 481 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 29, 2017

Fourth, the Court determined class counsel was qualified to adequately represent the class, and the interests of the class representatives were adequately aligned with the other class members because they allegedly suffered … “An appellate court may find an abuse of discretion where the district court’s decision rests upon a clearly erroneous finding of fact, an errant conclusion of law or an improper application of law to fact.” Id.

United States v. John Walter Trala A/K/A Sonny A/K/A Walter John Trala John Walter Trala

386 F.3d 536 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 26, 2004

In addition, Traía himself lied to police about his name and the source of the money in his car, and those statements were clearly relevant and admissible. See United States v. Levy, 865 F.2d 551, 558 (3d. … In it he first argues that the Career Offender Enhancement that he received "requires a district court’s findings as to both the nature of the instant offense and prior convictions, i.e., whether such convictions qualify

Breakiron v. Horn

642 F.3d 126 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 18, 2011

Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), which constitutes “clearly established Federal law” for AEDPA purposes. Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 391 (2000); Rainey v. Varner, 603 F.3d 189, 197 (3d Cir. 2010). … Thus, under AEDPA, we may not grant relief on this claim unless that ruling either was “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United

E.T. Browne Drug Co. v. Cococare Products, Inc.

538 F.3d 185 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 5, 2008

This raises the question of the proper genus for the Court’s genericness analysis: the established product class or a new product class that modifies the established product class with the new characteristic. … A controversy clearly existed as to the validity of the term “Cocoa Butter Formula” and its place on the supplemental register.

Neal Crispin v. Commissioner of Internal Reven

708 F.3d 507 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 25, 2013

claimed loss on the grounds that Crispin‟s CARDS transaction lacked economic substance and held that he could not avoid the penalty because he had not relied reasonably or in good faith on the advice of an independent and qualified … The facts and circumstances of this case demonstrate that there was nothing reasonable about Crispin‟s reliance on the Pullman Opinion to immunize him from the underpayment penalty.

United States v. Robert W. Lee, Sr.

359 F.3d 194 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 20, 2004

United States, 373 U.S. 427 , 83 S.Ct. 1381 , 10 L.Ed.2d 462 (1963) clearly demonstrates this. … Moreover, limitations that arise under the doctrine of qualified immu *225 nity may make it exceedingly difficult to establish the predicate showing of unreasonableness required to sustain an action under Bivens , where the

Margaret Farris Charles Farris, H/w v. Jc Penney Company, Inc

176 F.3d 706 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 17, 1999

We do not believe, however, that [this] ground is so clearly available in this case to justify summary enforcement of the settlement agreements. … I think this case qualifies.

Olufemi Yussef Abdulai v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General of the United States

239 F.3d 542 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 12, 2001

Abdulai submits that this language clearly establishes that the BIA may not hold that an applicant has failed to meet his or her burden of proof simply because he or she has failed to produce corroborating evidence. … Because he concedes that none of the evidence presented at the remand hearing qualified as such corroboration, we conclude that the failure to include the evidence in the administrative record, though error, was harmless.

Heather Oberdorf v. Amazon.com Inc

930 F.3d 136 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 3, 2019

The dissent contends that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's decision in Cafazzo upended the Commonwealth's well-established four-factor analysis, thereby rendering the Francioni factors secondary to a threshold question of … The dissent concludes that because Amazon does not have any "exclusive" franchise in the sale of third-party products, it "clearly does not fit this description."

United States v. Introcaso

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 25, 2007

Street Allentown, PA 17901 Counsel for Appellee OPINION OF THE COURT AMBRO, Circuit Judge We decide principally whether a 19th-Century shotgun hanging on a defendant’s living room wall qualifies … But because the Government’s evidence was sufficient to establish that he was in possession of the hand grenades, we affirm the conviction on the second count.

Debbie Williams and Linda Stanley, Plaintiffs/appellees/cross-Appellants v. William R. Butler v. The City of Little Rock, Arkansas, Third-Party Defendant/appellant/cross

863 F.2d 1398 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 21, 1988

DISCUSSION 11 It is now axiomatic that although municipalities are not wholly immune from suit under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 , they may not be held liable on the theory of respondeat superior. In Monell v. … Thus, the City is liable for the damages established by Ms. Williams. 53 JOHN R.

United States v. Jones

566 F.3d 353 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 20, 2009

At that point, the jury selection process had taken well over one month, the District Court had pre-qualified approximately 40 potential jurors out of a pool of approximately 360 based on a detailed questionnaire, the attorneys … Jones cannot establish that “those who actually served on his jury lacked a capacity to reach a fair and impartial verdict based solely on the evidence they heard in the courtroom.” Rock v.

United States v. Serafini

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 28, 2000

See A. at 3337-38 (District Court's statement that the jury could not consider the conduit evidence to establish Serafini's knowledge). 18. … In addition, he helped to establish a fund to defray the cost of a bone marrow transplant for a man suffering from leukemia. See id. at 209.

Hahnemann University Hospital v. Edgar

74 F.3d 456 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 16, 1996

Ct. 1995) ("Petitioner has failed to establish that any of the statutory exceptions apply[.]"). … While in a particular case, a litigant may challenge documents for which protection is claimed as not meeting the "concerning persons in treatment" standard, that situation is clearly not present here, since the documents

Morris v. Secretary Defense

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 22, 2005

The ALJ found that Morris was a “qualified individual with a disability” and that the DLA had “intentionally discriminated” against him between February 27, 1992, and April 11, 1992, by failing, in spite of his repeated requests … Chandler established that this provision should be viewed as creating a right to de novo consideration of the employee’s claims. Chandler, 425 U.S. at 863.

National Labor Relations Board v. W. C. McQuaide, Inc.

552 F.2d 519 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 24, 1977

The economic striker’s status as an employee continues until he has obtained other regular and substantially equivalent employment and he is entitled to reinstatement “if and when a job for which [he] is qualified becomes … Clearly, this is far more than an inquiry into availability. Indeed, past Board decisions support our view that this letter constitutes a valid offer of reinstatement.

Henry Siedzikowski v. Administrator Federal Emergency Management Agency

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 8, 2024

. § 4017 (establishing the National Flood Insurance Fund); 44 C.F.R. §§ 62.1–6 (setting forth the NFIP Direct Program). … Without either, the Siedzikowskis did not establish a breach of a duty by NFIP Direct to pay for direct property losses under their flood insurance policy.

Shakur Gannaway v. Nicholas Karetas

438 F. App'x 61 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 19, 2011

Indeed, as should be evident, Gannaway’s conduct satisfied all three of the main ―reasonable police‖ factors from Graham: the crime was severe, he clearly was a threat to others, and he continued his attempts to evade arrest … As there was no constitutional violation, we need not engage in an analysis of qualified immunity.