Case law

Humphrey v. Secretary Pennsylvania Department of Corrections

712 F. App'x 122 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 20, 2017

At a minimum, as the District Court noted, there was clearly neither a “settlement agreement” between Humphrey and the D.A., nor an implied contract between Humphrey and the state agents. … Norton, 350 F.3d 399, 417 (3d Cir. 2003) (stating that filing a federal complaint qualifies as petitioning the government and is, therefore, protected so long as the complaint is not frivolous); see also Ross v. Dist.

Oberti v. Board Of Education

995 F.2d 1204 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 28, 1993

We accept the district court's findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous. See David D. v. … We therefore defer to that court's findings, which, at all events, are not clearly erroneous.

No. 93-5777, 93-5794

89 F.3d 976 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 22, 1996

To qualify as an "occurrence" the environmental damage must not have been "expected nor intended from the standpoint of the insured." Morton, 629 A.2d at 836 . … Nevertheless, the record here could clearly support a finding that Chemical Leaman was "stonewalling" regulatory authorities.

Martin Eisenberg and Arthur Nissen, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Frederick M. Gagnon, Bernard A. Boyers, David E. Wasserstrom, Charles Lieberman, Edward Hershenhorn, David Weinstein, John W. Pelino, Morris L. Chucas, Tom P. Monteverde, Wasserstrom & Chucas, and Pelino, Wasserstrom, Chucas & Monteverde, P.C. v. Gelrod, Fox and Co., Clarence Rainess & Co., Seidman and Seidman, Gruntal and Co., Marvin Welsch and Jack Panich. Appeal of Martin Eisenberg and Arthur Nissen, in Nos. 84-1214 & 84-1225. Appeal of David E. Wasserstrom, in No. 84-1261

766 F.2d 770 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 26, 1985

First, defendants clearly were willing to present the tax benefit issue as a jury question and allow the jury to decide whether, on the facts, there was any tax benefit. … One circumstance that has clearly changed is that Eisenberg and Nissen have now won a judgment on the merits.

International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Local 249 v. Western Pennsylvania Motor Carriers Association

660 F.2d 76 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 25, 1981

We find this argument without merit. 21 The language of the injunction indicates clearly that all Association members were to be prohibited from spotting. … Such an immunity would seriously jeopardize the ever present goal of industrial peace.

Ernest Johnson v. Amtrak

390 F. App'x 109 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 17, 2010

Prima Facie Case of Discrimination To make out a prima facie case of discrimination under the ADA, Johnson must establish that: (1) he is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) he was either excluded from … Johnson’s diabetes and colitis clearly constitute physical, and likely permanent, impairments.

Parks LLC v. Tyson Foods, Inc.

863 F.3d 220 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 6, 2017

(Opening Br. at 22; App. at 633-34.) 12 Prior to 1989, § 43(a) of the Lanham Act did not clearly distinguish between false association and false advertising claims and merely prohibited “false designation … See 2 McCarthy on Trademarks § 15:11 n.1 (“Not every response rate that shows likely confusion establishes secondary meaning and not every survey that fails to show likely confusion establishes an absence of secondary meaning

US Airways, Inc. v. McCutchen

663 F.3d 671 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 16, 2011

The record on appeal does not establish what amount was disbursed to McCutchen. … This animating principle of equity clearly applies to a trustee’s claim for reimbursement from its beneficiary. “Equity courts possessed the power . . . to prevent [a] trustee’s unjust enrichment.” Cigna, 131 S.

Aravinthan Balasubramanrim v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

143 F.3d 157 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 1, 1998

The conflict stems primarily from tensions between the minority Tamils and the majority Sinhalese. 1 In an effort to establish an independent Tamil state in the north, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam have been in armed … “The Board’s findings ... must ... be set aside when the record before a Court of Appeals clearly precludes the Board’s decision from being justified by a fair estimate of the worth of the testimony of witnesses or its informed

United States v. Lynell Guyton

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 18, 2025

The Government rejoins that “in the context of the overall charge,” the instructions clearly referred to federal law. Gov’t Br. 18 (citation omitted). … The Government’s § 851 information alleged that Guyton’s 2011 conviction qualified as a serious drug felony. Recall the background of the predicate offense.

Motley v. New Jersey State Police

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 1, 1999

To establish that he was a "qualified individual with a disability" under the ADA and the comparable provisions of the NJLAD,5 Motley must be able to demonstrate that he ___________________________________________________ … How can we, now, after Cleveland, deny this opportunity which is clearly mandated?

United States v. Jones

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.

In Re: Tracey L. Schick

418 F.3d 321 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 9, 2005

. § 17 :29A-35(b) (the “surcharge statute”) establishes a rating plan under which the MVC levies surcharges on drivers in one of several different situations. … In such a circumstance, there clearly would be the required judicial process or proceeding to transform the MVC's lien into a judicial lien.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

728 F.2d 167 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 11, 1984

I think it is clearly a jury issue and I will deny your motion. 15 App. at 246-47. This is the only reference by defendants to the sufficiency of the evidence. … Raffiani clearly articulates, it is available only for "legislative," as distinct from managerial, activities of members of local governments. 708 F.2d at 99 .

Armstrong v. Dwyer

155 F.3d 211 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 31, 1998

In the present matter, the interrogatories submitted to the jury clearly satisfy this standard. … As the preceding discussion demonstrates, Congress has clearly created a statutory scheme that is highly protective of information related to PRO proceedings. d.

United States v. Dominic Broxton

666 F. App'x 149 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 16, 2016

It is the defendant’s burden to establish plain error. Id. at 734. … For example, the magistrate judge likely engaged in an ex parte side-bar communication with the government’s attorney, did not clearly indicate when the court moved from one examination to the next, and did not clearly distinguish

James Cibula v. Fox

570 F. App'x 129 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 26, 2014

First, the court held the Parole Defendants enjoyed absolute immunity for adjudicative decisions, like parole denials. … But Cibula has failed to establish the doctrine applies here.

American Telephone And Telegraph Company v. Winback And Conserve Program, Inc.

42 F.3d 1421 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 9, 1994

The resellers then sell the services to individual businesses that do not generate sufficient volume to qualify individually for the high-volume discounts. … That case is clearly inapposite. There, the Court relied not just on the language of the statute, but the scheme of causation that must be proven in order to hold a party liable.

Antonio Castro v. Attorney General United States

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 14, 2020

Therefore, Castro’s second motion to reopen, which was filed on December 20, 2019, was clearly time- and number-barred. … The Board also concluded that Castro failed to establish grounds for sua sponte reopening.

United States v. Wecht

484 F.3d 194 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 12, 2007

First, the Orsini documents were filed with the motion for in camera review which “clearly establishes” them as judicial records. Goldstein, 260 F.3d at 192 . … “Good cause is established on a showing that disclosure will work a clearly defined and serious injury to the party seeking closure. The injury must be shown with specificity.