Case law

FTC v. Check Investors Inc

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 6, 2007

More specifically, they argue that [a]n individual’s conduct, when taken as a whole, determines whether he or she qualifies as a consumer for FDCPA purposes. … Check Investors clearly had no intention of servicing the debt.

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

561 F.3d 132 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 31, 2009

. § 2011 et seq., establishes a “comprehensive regulatory framework for the ongoing review of nuclear power plants located in the United States.” … NRC, that the NRC’s “mere assertion of unquan-tifiability” does not immunize it from having to conduct a NEPA analysis. See 869 F.2d at 744 n. 31.

United States v. Cornelius W. Sullivan

333 F.2d 100 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 10, 1964

established by Mr. … And with respect to these sums Manufacturers is clearly safeguarded from liability on the present facts.

Sylviana v. Attorney General

263 F. App'x 255 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 7, 2008

INS, 12 F.3d 1233, 1240 (3d Cir. 1993) (“If persecution were defined . . . expansively, a significant percentage of the world’s population would qualify for asylum in this country—and it seems most unlikely that Congress … Far from “compel[ling] a contrary conclusion,” the evidence Sylviana presents clearly fails to meet 5 the burden required under the CAT.

Interpace Corporation v. City of Philadelphia, and Honorable John Morgan Davis, Judge, United States District Court, Nominal

438 F.2d 401 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 9, 1971

Further, "[f]actors (A) — (D) are listed, non-exhaustively, as pertinent to the findings." 3 So also various commentators have noted that the "findings" language distinguishes a Rule 23(b) (3) class action from one qualifying … And the denial of a jury trial under Rule 39(a) is even more clearly a legal question which ordinarily would not call for findings of fact.

Miguel Angel Ulloa Santos v. Attorney General United States

552 F. App'x 197 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 15, 2014

Accordingly, to qualify for asylum as a refugee, Ulloa must establish persecution “on account of” one of the five statutory grounds. See Gao v. Ashcroft, 299 F.3d 266, 272 (3d Cir. 2002). … But the BIA did not explicitly cite this theory, nor did it clearly articulate any basis for its no- nexus finding.

Tomoko Funayama v. Nichia America Corporation

482 F. App'x 723 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 17, 2012

Funayama also stated that Kuboniwa asked to go to her apartment for a drink many times from 1999 until 2003, when on the advice of a human resources employee, she clearly declined an invitation. … is a member of a protected class; (2) she was qualified for the position she sought to attain or retain; (3) she suffered an adverse employment action; and (4) the action occurred under circumstances that give rise to

Reynaldo Reyes v. Netdeposit

802 F.3d 469 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 2, 2015

obtain bank account information which was used to make unauthorized debits from the the consumers’ bank accounts.2 In Reyes’ case, in an unsolicited phone call in November 2007, telemarketer NHS Systems told Reyes that he qualified … “The district court abused its discretion if its decision rests upon a clearly erroneous finding of fact, an errant conclusion of law or an improper application of law to fact.”

Oddi v. Ford Motor Co.

234 F.3d 136 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 13, 2000

Thus, Oddi must first establish that the vehicle was defective. … Rule 702 thus "clearly contemplates some degree of regulation of the subjects about which an expert may testify." Id. at 589. Consequently, the Court established a "gatekeeping role for the [trial] judge."

Konstantin Bugarenko v. Attorney General United States

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 23, 2020

But in reviewing anew the IJ’s hardship determination, the Board clearly considered the hardship to more than just qualifying relatives, acknowledging Bugarenko’s “lengthy period of lawful residence, family ties in the … DHS met its burden of establishing a conviction under 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2702(a)(4).

Smith v. Magras

124 F.3d 457 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 14, 1997

Although the inherent power of the courts to regulate attorneys is well established, see, e.g., Ex parte Secombe, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 9, 13 , 15 L.Ed. 565 (1857), it is also well established that legislatures have the power … It cannot seriously be said, however, that the power to regulate attorneys is one of the irreducible powers of a court completely immune from legislative interference.

United States v. Nicodemo Scarfo

41 F.4th 136 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 15, 2022

Pelullo has not established any error based on the government’s use of filter teams. IV. … All 12 of you have to agree on at least two predicate or qualifying acts as to any individual defendant.

United States v. Richard Balter, No. 94-5593. United States of America v. Kenneth Cutler, No. 94-5625. United States of America v. Chris Oscar Dejesus, No. 94-5626

91 F.3d 427 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 16, 1996

The court ruled that the prejudicial effect of this statement on co-defendant Garcia outweighed the probative value for Balter to establish fear. … Moreover, the Department of Justice has since promulgated a regulation formally establishing the policy identified in the original memorandum.

Tabron v. Grace

6 F.3d 147 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 5, 1993

Tabron's lack of legal experience clearly put him at a disadvantage countering the defendants' discovery tactics, such as the defendants' failure to supplement their responses, as promised, to nine of the sixteen interrogatories … We explained: 51 Congress has authorized the courts to waive the prepayment of such items as filing fees and transcripts if a party qualifies to proceed in forma pauperis. 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1915 .

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, an Illinois Corporation v. Edmond Blystra Barbara Blystra, Individually and as Parent and Natural Guardian of Kevin Blystra, a Minor, and Third-Party v. Farmers Insurance Company of Arizona, Third-Party

86 F.3d 1007 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 18, 1996

In our view, this statement establishes Kevin neither intended nor expected to be shot. … Clearly, such use falls within Britt 's "normal use" requirement.

Atlantic City Municipal Utilities Authority v. Regional Administrator

803 F.2d 96 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 20, 1986

Clearly, the ranking of projects in a priority list addresses the relative, not the inherent, merits of each. … The same conclusion would follow with respect to any monetary claim by virtue of the fact that the APA does not waive sovereign immunity in monetary claims cases. 5 U.S.C.

Handron v. Secretary Department of Health & Human Services

677 F.3d 144 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 20, 2012

Handron did not qualify for fee reimbursement under the EAJA. Dr. … represented by a writing. 19  While it may seem strange to make eligibility for fee reimbursement contingent on whether or not the government decides to urge its position, this was clearly

Hotel and Restaurant Employees and Bartenders International Union Local 54 v. Danziger

709 F.2d 815 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 6, 1983

"ERISA's authors clearly meant to preclude the States from avoiding through form the substance of the preemption provision." Alessi v. … Clearly that was threatened when the Division moved before the Commission for an order disqualifying the Union from collecting dues from its 8000 plus members employed by casino hotels.

Robert S. v. Stetson School, Inc.

256 F.3d 159 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 3, 2001

In light of Rendell-Baker, it is appar ent that many of the factors upon which Robert relies here ar e insufficient to establish state action. … S 6351(a)(2)(iii), but also to "[a]ny individual resident within or without [the] Commonwealth" who is found to be qualified or to a qualified "private organization." 42 PA. CONS. STAT. ANN.

United States v. Nathaniel Coles

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 20, 2023

Given Coles so clearly challenged his factual guilt, the fact that he had meetings with the government that apparently came to nothing does not provide a basis for finding the District Court erred, let alone clearly erred … Thus, the government argues “an admission made under this arrangement hardly establishes acceptance of responsibility[.]”