Case law

United States v. Theophilus Blackston

940 F.2d 877 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 29, 1991

The language of section 3583(g) is also significant in that it does not qualify or modify the term in any respect. … There is, however, a category of cases that clearly repudiates the government’s position on the use/possession issue. Most notable of this group is People v.

Pediatrix Screening, Inc. v. Telechem International, Inc.

602 F.3d 541 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 20, 2010

That legal dispute is clearly set forth in Pediatrix’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion, filed early in the litigation, to dismiss the tort counterclaims. … Such complications as statutes of limitations, damages, and standards of proof come to mind as differences that have long been established.

In the Matter of the Complaint of Bankers Trust Company, as Owner-Trustee and Monsanto Company as Chartered Owner, and Keystone Shipping Co., as Chartered Owner and Operator of the S.S. Edgar M. Queeny, for Exoneration From and Limitation of Liability. And Villaneuva Compania Naviera, S.A., Amoco Overseas Oil Company and Amoco Transport Company, Third-Party v. Bethlehem Steel Corporation, General Electric Company and the William Powell Company, Third-Party Appeal of Bankers Trust Company, Monsanto Company and Keystone Shipping Co., at No. 80-1405. Appeal of B. P. Oil Inc. And Sohio Petroleum Company, at No. 80- 1450. Appeal of Villaneuva Compania Naviera, S.A., at No. 80-1496. In the Matter of Complaint of Villaneuva Compania Naveria, S.A., Owner of the Tank Vessel Corinthos, for Exoneration From and Limitation of Liability, Royal Globe Insurance Company, Intervenor National Grange Mutual Insurance Company and Insurance Company of North America v. Bethlehem Steel Corporation, General Electric Company, the William Powell Company, British Petroleum, Ltd., B. P. Oil Inc. And Sohio Petroleum Company, Third-Party Appeal of Bankers Trust Company, Monsanto Company and Keystone Shipping Co., at No. 80-1494. Appeal of B. P. Oil Inc. And Sohio Petroleum Company, at No. 80- 1495. Appeal of Villaneuva Compania Naviera, S.A., at No. 80-1497

651 F.2d 160 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 24, 1981

Scattered and isolated items taken out of context were presented to the court, and, surprisingly, the trial judge found a nexus of interrelationships to establish privity and knowledge. … And, certainly, in this circuit, industry standards and practices normally establish only minimal requirements, and do not create immunity from liability. Indeed, in Voegele Company, Inc. v.

National Labor Relations Board v. S. E. Nichols-Dover, Inc. Spencer Shoe Corporation and Imac Food Systems, Inc

414 F.2d 561 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 4, 1969

The trial examiner determined that the appropriate unit should include employees of Nichols and its licensees, Spencer and IMAC. 9 Within this unit, he specifically found qualified as employees the two previously discharged … The Court further pointed out that: “* * * employees should be bound by the clear language of what they sign unless that language is deliberately and clearly canceled by a union adherent with words calculated to direct the

United States v. Carlos Wiltshire

568 F. App'x 135 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 3, 2014

phase of the trial, concerning the felon-in-possession counts, the District Court instructed the jury as to the definition of “possession” as follows, in conformity with the Third Circuit model instruction: To establish … These two instructions clearly convey the idea that, in order to prove constructive possession, the Government must prove that Wiltshire knew of the existence and his possession of the firearm and that he had the power

Shearer v. Shearer

356 F.2d 391 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 30, 1965

The majority now accepts this explanation, but the district judge who saw and heard the parties did not accept it, and I see no reason why we should consider ourselves better qualified to decide it. … This evidence is clearly sufficient to sustain the finding of mutual incompatibility.

Wells Fargo Guard Services, a Division of Baker Protective Services, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

659 F.2d 363 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 15, 1981

Martin and the establishment of the Board of Trustees was true.” … Martin as officers so that the Guild could qualify as a bargaining agent. Letter of Mr. Martin to the security guards; appendix at 230-231. 3 .

National Labor Relations Board v. International Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Ironworkers, Local 11, Afl-Cio

864 F.2d 1113 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 9, 1989

In the absence of specific evidence of discriminatory intent, Ironworkers I established a two-pronged test. … While we do not doubt that such a recording would have clearly shown the motivation behind these referrals, we read Ironworkers I as holding that even a referral outside of the consent decree’s established procedure is permissible

Suburban Transfer Service, Inc. v. Beech Holdings, Inc., Charles A. Stanziale, Jr., Trustee for Suburban Aviation Service, Inc., Plaintiff-Intervenor v. Beech Holdings, Inc., a Kansas Corporation and Suburban Transfer Service, Inc., a New Jersey Corporation

716 F.2d 220 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 7, 1983

It asserts that it loaned money to Aviation in full accordance with the requirements of section 34 of the Agreement and thus that it qualifies as a "Lender" as defined in that section. … establishes a condition precedent 7 to the creation of a valid loan as defined in the Agreement.

Lyon v. McKeefrey

171 F. 384 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 29, 1909

The receivers thus appointed at once qualified and proceeded upon the execution of their office. … But the court below has clearly exhausted its jurisdiction, so far as the purposes of the original bill are concerned.

Coefield v. GPU

125 F. App'x 445 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 11, 2005

He was also informed in January 2002 that, if he qualified for the promotion after the next test, he would receive back-pay retroactive to the end of his initial qualifying period. … Appellant is clearly a member of a protected class, and the District Court presumed that he was qualified for the Senior Relay Technician position.

Eileen Anne Neely, in No. 93-2069 v. Club Med Management Services, Inc. Club Med Sales, Inc. Club Med, Inc., Third-Party Holiday Village (St. Lucia), Ltd. v. Joseph Lemaire, Third-Party Club Med Management Services, Inc. And Holiday Village (St. Lucia) Inc., in No. 93-2102

63 F.3d 166 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 26, 1995

"Navigation of boats in navigable waters clearly falls within the substantial relationship...." Id. Thus, the travels of the Long John qualify despite the short distances involved in its voyages. Cf. Sinclair v. … Unlike the dissent, our opinion clearly states that the quoted proposition is limited to cases where the substance of relevant foreign law is not established.

Nazay v. Miller

949 F.2d 1323 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 6, 1991

Rather, ERISA is concerned with the administration of an established plan and its elements." Hlinka v. … It therefore qualifies as a decision subject to the fiduciary requirements of ERISA." The court also held that "the Board's action cannot be justified even under [the arbitrary and capricious] standard of review."

Ronald Saintil v. Borough of Carteret

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 29, 2024

Legal Standard and Analysis9 “To recover under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, [a plaintiff] must establish that a state actor engaged in conduct that deprived him of ‘rights, privileges, or immunities’ secured by the constitution … On remand, the District Court should determine whether Crocco and O’Connor are entitled to qualified immunity. We will affirm the remainder of the District Court’s order. 17 Cf. McNair v.

United States v. Rosado-Figueroa

285 F. App'x 8 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 3, 2008

Rosado-Figueroa’s plea agreement with the government contained a stipulation that “[a]s of the date of this letter,” he qualified for a two-level downward adjustment for acceptance of responsibility and that he would also … A defendant seeking an offense level reduction for acceptance of responsibility has the burden of establishing that he or she is entitled to the reduction by a preponderance of the evidence. United States v.

Medico, Philip T. v. Time, Inc

643 F.2d 134 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 27, 1981

concerns underlying Pape and Edwards are heightened when the source of newsworthy defamation is a government official or report. 38 We are careful to point out that we do not decide at this time that the First Amendment immunizes … Other Pennsylvania cases applying the fair report privilege cast little light on the question here, inasmuch as they involved reports of clearly official proceedings. See Binder v.

Barbee v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority

323 F. App'x 159 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 2, 2009

To establish a prima facie case of age discrimination under the ADEA, a plaintiff must demonstrate that he or she (1) was over the age of 40; (2) was qualified for the position; (3) suffered an adverse employment decision … Under this framework, it is clear that Barbee could not establish a prima facie case of age discrimination because he was no longer qualified for his job.

Albrecht v. Hamilton

233 F. App'x 122 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 26, 2007

or immunities secured by the Constitution.” … Thus, the complaint clearly fails to give the defendants “fair notice of what the plaintiff’s claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.”

Govt of VI v. Davis

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 27, 2009

In Raffel, a case decided decades before both Miranda and Doyle, the Supreme Court concluded that Fifth Amendment “immunity from giving testimony is one which the defendant may waive by offering himself as a witness” and, … 1997) (“[T]he canon of strict construction of criminal statutes, or rule of lenity, ensures fair warning by so resolving ambiguity in a criminal 23 statute as to apply it only to conduct clearly

United States v. Campbell

205 F. App'x 59 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 31, 2006

Based on these facts, the District Court found by a preponderance of the evidence that Campbell qualified for a 2-level enhancement under United States Sentencing Guideline § 2G2.1(b)(2). … As such, we cannot say that the District Court’s finding was clearly erroneous. For the above reasons, we will affirm the judgment of the District Court. 5