Case law

Skehan v. Board of Trustees of Bloomsburg State College

669 F.2d 142 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 26, 1982

On remand, the district court found that the one individual defendant whose conduct was at issue, President Nossen, acted in good faith and without malice, and was entitled to the qualified immunity recognized in Wood v. … Rather, the opinion focuses on the judicially-created common law doctrine of sovereign immunity- In light of the requirement applicable in this case that states 6 must clearly and expressly waive their Eleventh Amendment

Bell Atlantic-Pennsylvania, Inc. v. The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

273 F.3d 337 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 2, 2001

See, e.g., Puerto Rico Aqueduct, 506 U.S. at 144 (state sovereign immunity immediately appealable); Mitchell, 472 U.S. at 526 (qualified executive immunity immediately appealable); Larsen v. … Unlike qualified immunity or Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity, claim preclusion is not based on a right to be free from all the costs and burdens of having to be a party to a case in the first instance or from having

Hogan v. Zletz

410 F.2d 187 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 18, 1969

That argument is not premised on a challenge to these immunities in any form in patent proceedings but is concerned only as to the allowance of the attorney-client and work product immunities in connection with the solicitation … Hickman grants to attorney’s work product a qualified immunity from discovery stating 329 U.S. p. 511, 67 S.Ct. p. 394: “We do not mean to say that all written materials obtained or prepared by an adversary's counsel with

Nichole Medical Equipment & Supply, Inc. v. Tricenturion, Inc.

694 F.3d 340 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 13, 2012

found TriCenturion and NHIC were entitled to official immunity. … Nichole Medical argues that “government contractors who engage in illegal conduct have no claim to immunity” and, therefore, official immunity should not be extended to Appellees. ***** Appellant’s

National Railroad Passenger Corporation v. Commonwealth Of Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

848 F.2d 436 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 21, 1988

Secs. 501-658 , establishing the National Railroad Passenger Corporation, a private corporation better known by its official nickname "Amtrak." … Sec. 531 , held that a special assessment would not qualify as a real estate "tax". Federal Reserve Bank v. Metrocentre Improvement Dist.

Rashonna Ransom v. GreatPlains Finance LLC

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 4, 2025

That factor often matters more and speaks more clearly here. We thus hold that the lender is not part of the tribe’s government and so lacks its sov- ereign immunity. 3  I. … When the other factors are qualified and this one is resounding, it may some- times tip the balance all on its own.

John E. Zeller v. Donegal School District Board of Education

517 F.2d 600 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 8, 1975

Certainly the defense of “good faith,” closely akin to the qualified immunity described by the court in Wood v. … Although Wood establishes a qualified immunity for school board members, I see nothing in that opinion which would reorder the burden of pleading and proving that immunity.

Rashonna Ransom v. GreatPlains Finance LLC

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 26, 2025

That factor often matters more and speaks more clearly here. We thus hold that the lender is not part of the tribe’s government and so lacks its sov- ereign immunity. I. … When the other factors are qualified and this one is resounding, it may some- times tip the balance all on its own.

Philip Wharton v. Carl Danberg

854 F.3d 234 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 19, 2017

The Court also found that all claims against Defendants in their official capacities were barred by sovereign immunity; it declined to reach the question of qualified immunity; and it granted summary judgment on Appellants … We will affirm.15 15 Having affirmed the District Court’s grants of summary judgment on the merits, we need not reach the other issues in the Court’s opinion: qualified immunity, sovereign immunity, and class certification

Smith v. Government of the Virgin Islands

375 F.2d 714 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 23, 1967

Government of the Virgin Islands, 4 V.I. 489 , 329 F.2d 131 (3 Cir. 1964), and held that plaintiff 1 was qualified to bring the action because there was no requirement that a taxpayer must show his liability for any minimum … Under this test, the Virgin Islands had clearly reached the stage of an “organized” territory by 1936.

Zamboni v. Stamler

847 F.2d 73 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 17, 1988

In addition to their other arguments, the individual defendants assert that they are immune from suit in their individual capacities under the qualified immunity doctrine of Harlow v. … rejected defendants’ qualified immunity claim in the political patronage context. .

Tavarez v. Klingensmith

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 15, 2004

This amendment language of the statute . . . clearly permits made explicit that the immunity afforded a claim against a co-worker or supervisor by § 284(a) did not shield a borrowing for their specific … “statutory employer and possibility that a borrowing employer or a borrowed servant” doctrine statutory employer may qualify

Scott ex rel. Weintraub v. Plante

691 F.2d 634 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 18, 1982

A qualified immunity defense based on unsettled law did not originate with Harlow v. Fitzgerald. See, e.g., Procunier v. Navarette, 434 U.S, 555, 565, 98 S.Ct. 855, 861 , 55 L.Ed.2d 24 (1978). … In light of this specific statutory recognition, defendants can hardly claim that the rights which Scott seeks to vindicate, as a matter of law, were not clearly established.

United States v. Bazzano

712 F.2d 826 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 17, 1983

Immunity will be denied if the proffered testimony is found to be ambiguous, not clearly exculpatory, cumulative or if it is found to relate only to the credibility of the government’s witnesses. 615 F.2d at 972 (footnote … As for “judicially fashioned” immunity, Mollica clearly failed to make “an application ... to the district court naming the proposed witness and specifying the particulars of the witness’ testimony.” Id. at 972 .

Michelle Dewalt v. Louis W. Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human Services

963 F.2d 27 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 21, 1992

Plaintiff-appellee, Michelle Dewalt, established her entitlement to an award of counsel fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2414 , after an eight-year struggle to obtain SSI benefits under Title XVI of … It is a fundamental principle of statutory construction that words in a statute are to be given their ordinary meaning unless the context clearly suggests otherwise.

Stewart Merritts, Jr. v. Leslie Richards

62 F.4th 764 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 16, 2023

The in rem condemnation action qualifies as a state-court judicial proceeding. … That issue, along with qualified immunity and the type of damages available for individual-capacity just compensation claims, if actionable under § 1983, see generally Carey v.

Koslow v. Comm of PA

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 21, 2002

It clearly has not done so explicitly, as there is no legislation that can be so construed. … That interest, which is undeniably significant and clearly reflected in the legislative history, flows with every dollar spent by a department or agency receiving federal funds.

Leonard C. McNemar v. The Disney Store, Inc.

91 F.3d 610 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 31, 1996

In light of this clearly established rationale, the district court was well within its discretion to hold that MeNemar “is es-topped from arguing now that he is ‘qualified’ under the ADA and NJLAD.” Dist. Ct. … Nothing vests such immunity. VII.

Adolph Michelin v. Warden Moshannon Valley Correctional Center

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 2, 2026

Sovereign immunity is appropriate where “Congress could have more clearly authorized recovery.” In re Lansaw, 853 F.3d 657, 667 n.8 (3d Cir. 2017). … “[A] legal position is substantially justified if it relates to an unsettled or close question of law, but not if it clearly offends established precedent.” Russell v.

Jane Doe John Roe v. Elijah Wright, Individually and in His Official Capacity as a Deputy in the Pulaski County Sheriff's Department Carroll Gravett, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Sheriff of Pulaski County, Boyd A. Williams, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Chief of Police of the City of Helena, Arkansas, Police Department, Boyd A. Williams, Individually and in His Official Capacity as the Chief of Police of the City of Helena, Arkansas, Police Department, Third Party v. Carroll Gravett, Third Party Jane Doe John Roe v. Elijah Wright, Individually and in His Official Capacity as a Deputy in the Pulaski County Sheriff's Department Carroll Gravett, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Sheriff of Pulaski County Boyd A. Williams, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Chief of Police of the City of Helena, Arkansas, Police Department, Boyd A. Williams, Individually and in His Official Capacity as the Chief of Police of the City of Helena, Arkansas, Police Department, Third Party v. Carroll Gravett, Third Party Jane Doe John Roe v. Elijah Wright, Individually and in His Official Capacity as a Deputy in the Pulaski County Sheriff's Department Carroll Gravett, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Sheriff of Pulaski County, Boyd A. Williams, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Chief of Police of the City of Helena, Arkansas, Police Department, Boyd A. Williams, Individually and in His Official Capacity as the Chief of Police of the City of Helena, Arkansas, Police Department, Third Party v. Carroll Gravett, Third Party

82 F.3d 265 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 19, 1996

The district court also held that Williams was entitled to qualified immunity. 14 The district court exercised supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367 over the plaintiffs' state law claims and denied Williams … ' motion to dismiss the pendent state claim of outrage. 15 The district court certified the causation and qualified immunity questions concerning Williams to this Court and permission to appeal was granted. 16 On appeal,