Case law

Massachusetts School Of Law At Andover, Inc. v. American Bar Association

107 F.3d 1026 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 28, 1997

MSL argues on appeal that the Noerr principles do not apply here because private anti-competitive conduct is immunized only where it is (1) clearly and affirmatively authorized by state policy, and (2) actively supervised … The district court found (at least by implication), and we agree, that MSL's jurisdictional claims were clearly frivolous.

City of Englewood v. Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya

773 F.2d 31 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 19, 1985

The County agency sought guidance from the New Jersey Attorney General, who expressed the opinion that the property did not qualify for tax exemption under governing treaties because the residence was acquired only for “occasional … activity upon which the claim is based, or (4) the execution relates to a judgment establishing rights in property— (B) which is immovable and situated in the United States: ■ Provided, That such property is not used for

United States v. Walter Morrison A/K/A "Skip" Morrison Appeal of Nick Boscia

535 F.2d 223 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 3, 1976

Villanova were the cause of Sally Bell’s choice not to incriminate herself. 9 Such a finding would seem indeed mandated by the burden of proof established for such a question in Webb . … However, 18 U.S.C. § 6002 does not provide an “immunity bath” for witnesses but merely provides “use immunity,” so that no testimony compelled by the grant of immunity, nor any information directly or indirectly derived from

UNITED STATES of America v. Arthur S. LOWELL, Appellant

649 F.2d 950 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 10, 1981

Smith established two roads by which a defendant could compel that a witness be given immunity. … 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.

Antonio Pearson v. Prison Health Service

850 F.3d 526 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 7, 2017

Farmer, 511 U.S. at 837. 6 6 Nurse Rhodes argued that he was entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established at the time of these events that an official would be liable for a delay … This fundamentally misunderstands the qualified immunity inquiry.

University Medical Center v. Sullivan (In re University Medical Center)

973 F.2d 1065 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 24, 1992

In such a ease, so long as the debtor’s claim against the government both qualifies as property of the estate and arises out of the same transaction or occurrence as the government’s claim, sovereign immunity is waived by … was not clearly erroneous.

Gurmankin v. Costanzo

626 F.2d 1115 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 30, 1980

The point was amplified by a footnote in which Justice Brennan, speaking for the majority, said: The absence of any damages remedy for violations of all but the most “clearly established” constitutional rights . . . could … Strickland, 420 U.S. 308 , 95 S.Ct. 992 , 43 L.Ed.2d 214 (1975), where the Supreme Court enunciated a qualified, good faith immunity for school board members acting within the scope of their official duties.

Patrick Sarullo v. United States Postal Service

352 F.3d 789 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 19, 2003

We therefore need not reach the question of qualified immunity discussed by the District Court. I. … immunity.

Crystallex Int'l Corp. v. Bolivarian Republic De Venezuela (In Re De Venezuela)

932 F.3d 126 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 29, 2019

In other words, when a party establishes that an exception to sovereign immunity applies in a merits action that results in a federal judgment—here, the exception for confirming arbitration awards, 28 U.S.C. § 1605(a)(6)— … First, it contends that § 1963 does not confer personal jurisdiction over it because the only method for establishing jurisdiction is by making proper service under the Sovereign Immunities Act’s service provisions, 28 U.S.C

Zimmerman v. United States Government

422 F.2d 326 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 19, 1970

This clearly shows that the remedy is exclusive. Consequently the District Court was without jurisdiction. ****** Nor does it matter that the present suit seeks injunctive relief. Crozier v. Fried. … We conclude that except for the section 1498 action to which the government has consented, the doctrine of sovereign immunity applies with full force. *329 Appellant contends, however, that sovereign immunity is no bar to

Ross v. Meagan

638 F.2d 646 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 16, 1981

immunity for official actions taken in good faith. 3 The district court did not rely on this qualified immunity, however, and the complaint does not allege that these two officials acted in good faith. … If appellants can establish these allegations as facts at a trial, unlikely though that may seem, they may be entitled to relief under § 1983. 4 The legal points raised by the complaint are at least "arguable on their merits

Armstrong Surgical Center, Inc. v. Armstrong County Memorial Hospital

185 F.3d 154 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 27, 1999

They insist, however, that the complaint alleges facts establishing that they are immune from antitrust liability. … It concluded its discussion of the city's immunity by "reiterat[ing] that, with the possible market participant exception, 4 any action that qualifies as state action is `ipso facto . . . exempt from the operation of the

Robert Downey v. Pennsylvania Department of Cor

968 F.3d 299 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 3, 2020

Downey’s rapidly deteriorating vision as a result of severe glaucoma clearly constituted an urgent condition necessitating immediate care. … It is well established that lawsuits seeking retrospective relief by private persons against a state, state officials, and state entities are generally prohibited. See, e.g., Regents of the Univ. of Cal. v.

Treasurer of New Jersey v. United States Department of the Treasury

684 F.3d 382 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 27, 2012

Payment agents, ordinarily banks, are financial institutions qualified under Treasury regulations to pay sums due on savings bonds. See 31 C.F.R. §§ 315 .2®, 353.2(f). … Intergovernmental Immunity The Supreme Court’s decision in McCulloch, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) at 322 , established the bedrock principle that “the States have no power, by taxation or otherwise, to retard, impede, burden, or in

Dwayne Rieco v. William Hebe

633 F. App'x 567 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 31, 2015

The Court also granted summary judgment to Farrer and Rigalbuto, reasoning that they were entitled to qualified immunity because Rieco had not demonstrated that he had a clearly established right to visitation and correspondence … Government officials performing discretionary functions are insulated from suit on qualified immunity grounds where their conduct did not violate a “clearly established statutory of constitutional right[] of which a reasonable

Karen Hepp v. Facebook

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 23, 2021

However, the codified findings and policies clearly tilt the balance in Facebook’s favor. … In one of the first cases to interpret § 230, the Fourth Circuit undertook a thorough and persuasive examination of the purpose of the statutory immunity established by Congress.

Bethlehem Manor Village LLC v. City of Bethlehem

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 12, 2025

Qualified immunity is “an immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability,” so immunity “is effectively lost if a case is erroneously permitted to go to trial.” Mitchell v. … “[O]fficers are entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established at the time.’”

George Rahsaan Brooks v. Lt. Andolina, Wilson Spencer, Paul Burgard, Capt. Tohey, Lawrence Weyandt, James Wigton, Russell Treece, George Petsock, Glen Jeffres, and Richard Thornburgh. Appeal of Lt. Andolina, Wilson Spencer, Paul Burgard, Capt. Tohey, Lawrence Weyandt, James Wigton, Russell Treece, George Petsock and Glen Jeffres. George Rahsaan Brooks v. Lt. Andolina, Wilson Spencer, Paul Burgard, Capt. Tohey, Lawrence Weyandt, James Wigton, Russell Treece, George Petsock, Glen Jeffres, and Richard Thornburgh

826 F.2d 1266 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 17, 1987

Moody, 606 F.2d 621, 624 (5th Cir.1979). 10 The prison officials contend, however, that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would

The Port Authority Police Benevolent Association, Inc. v. The Port Authority Of New York And New Jersey

819 F.2d 413 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 27, 1987

In 1931, the legislatures established a General Reserve Fund derived from the Authority's surplus revenues by which the Authority was able to become self-supporting. See N.J. Stat. Ann. 32:1-142 (West 1963); N.Y. … Kline, the Port Authority is clearly an agency of the state and is thus entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity.

James Thompson v. Norman Howard

679 F. App'x 177 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 17, 2017

We conclude that, under Supreme Court precedent, there is no clearly established law that makes the use of deadly force in such a scenario excessive, and the officer is therefore entitled to qualified immunity. … Accordingly, we cannot say that it was clearly established that Howard’s decision to fire at Thompson involved excessive force. Qualified immunity applies in exactly such circumstances. III.