Case law

United Wire, Metal & Machine Health & Welfare Fund v. Morristown Memorial Hospital

995 F.2d 1179 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 14, 1993

It reasoned that the law clearly related to ERISA plans in that to conform to the statute contractors had to maintain “schedules of supplements and wages and to make its books and records pertaining to wages, supplements … The statute allowed certain programs, like Blue Cross, to get discounts, but certain ERISA plans did not qualify.

United States v. Eli Chabot

793 F.3d 338 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 17, 2015

In Shapiro, the Supreme Court qualified this distinction when it held that the Fifth Amendment privilege did not apply to certain private papers that the law required a person to keep. Id. at 33. … To the extent that the Chabots argue that production of the requested account records will establish a significant link in the chain of evidence in their particular case, we are not persuaded that this precludes application

Karpenko v. Leendertz

619 F.3d 259 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 24, 2010

Leendertz argues that the District Court’s factual findings are clearly erroneous. We disagree. … We conclude that the District Court’s findings of fact were not clearly erroneous.

Oelsner v. United States

60 F. App'x 412 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 27, 2003

But the Supreme Court has stated clearly that an appellate court is not “required” to raise the affirmative defense of procedural default sua sponte. Trest v. … While both the indictment and jury instructions made reference to drydock work, they clearly defined the offense as work not within “the normal operation and service of a vessel.”

Mohamed Rafeeldeen v. Attorney General United States

642 F. App'x 117 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 7, 2016

It is well established that an imputed political opinion qualifies as a protected ground. See Lukwago v. Ashcroft, 329 F.3d 157, 181 (3d Cir. 2003). … INS the police clearly imputed LTTE political views to Ratnam, given that they “repeatedly demanded that he admit to being a Tiger.” 154 F.3d 990, 992 (9th Cir. 1998).

United States v. Askari

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 5, 1998

(permitting the imposition of a sentence outside the range established by the Guidelines "if the court finds `that there exists an aggravating or mitigating circumstance of a kind, or to a degree, not adequately taken into … The second issue seems even more clearly to be an issue for the district court rather than the en banc court of appeals.

Birambi v. Department of Homeland Security

134 F. App'x 488 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 9, 2004

To qualify for withholding of removal petitioners must establish that a clear probability exists that their life or freedom would be threatened in Suriname on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular … Although Irene Birambi's brother-in-law was allegedly a member of the Toekajana, his membership alone did not convert what was clearly a family argument into a political situation.

United States v. Kenneth McBroom

124 F.3d 533 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 28, 1997

The court was hesitant, however, to find that McBroom’s “troubled childhood” qualified him for a departure from the guideline range. … According to the court, [McBroom] clearly possessed his mental and intellectual faculties and was capable of exercising the power of reason.

Kim Vo v. Wetzel

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 10, 2022

Watson, 834 F.3d at 422 (even if the plaintiff establishes a prima facie case of retaliation, prison officials may still prevail if they establish that they would have made the same decision absent the protected conduct … Finally, the District Court properly granted summary judgment in favor of defendants on Vo’s free exercise claim.2 “Inmates clearly retain protections afforded by the First Amendment, including its directive that no law

In Re Diet Drugs (Phentermine/Fenfluramine/Dexfenfluramine) Products Liability Litigation

369 F.3d 293 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 25, 2004

are seeks to effectuate a settlement agreement confronted with requests for relief that by way of enjoining state court require interference with state civil proceedings, additional constraints qualify … would run afoul of well-established Indeed, a federal court is principles of equity and federalism.

Charles S. Lerman and Barbara Lerman, Cross-Appellants at No. 90-1835 at No. 90-1813 v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, at No. 90-1813 Cross-Appellee at No. 90-1835. Joseph L. Fraites and Evelyn Fraites, Cross-Appellants at No. 90-1836 at No. 90-1814 v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, at No. 90-1814 Cross-Appellee at No. 90-1836. Dwight B. Massey and Joann v. Massey, Cross-Appellants at No. 90-1837 at No. 90-1815 v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, at No. 90-1815 Cross-Appellee at No. 90-1837

939 F.2d 44 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 17, 1991

A straddle may be established (or "put on") using either option or future contracts or a combination of both. … According to the appellants, Congress clearly intended to sacrifice the tax revenue which would be received pursuant to disallowing deductions sought by dealers in its desire to clear the Tax Court's docket of cases involving

Scottsdale Insurance v. City of Easton

379 F. App'x 139 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 11, 2010

It is well-established that where, as here, the contractual language at issue is clear and unambiguous, the court should not, as Appellees suggest, look beyond the policy to ascertain the parties’ intent. Steuart v. … Immediately thereafter, it provides that “[wjithin this Coverage Form the word ‘insured’ means any person or organization qualifying as such under SECTION III — LAW ENFORCEMENT LIABILITY — WHO IS AN INSURED.” Id.

Clifford Murray v. David DiGuglielmo

591 F. App'x 142 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 10, 2014

Nevertheless, the Superior Court’s ruling still warrants deference under the AEDPA, and we conclude that it did not constitute an unreasonable application of clearly established Supreme Court precedent. … None of our opinions that Murray cites “purport to reflect clearly established law as set out in [the Supreme Court’s] holdings,” Parker, 132 S.Ct. at 155 (emphasis omitted), as none of them employed the deference owed

Supramaniyam Satheeskumar v. Attorney General United States

557 F. App'x 128 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 4, 2014

On July 17, 2012, the IJ granted Satheeskumar CAT protection, holding that he “presented sufficient evidence to establish that he would ‘more likely than not’ personally be at risk of torture if he were removed to Sri Lanka … After the BIA remanded proceedings to the IJ, the IJ determined that Satheeskumar qualified for CAT relief.

Harold L. Jarvis and Janet R. Jarvis, His Wife v. Raymond E. Johnson, K & L Builders and Gene C. Lenhart v. Lois E. Gillette. Harold L. Jarvis and Janet R. Jarvis, His Wife v. Michael P. Kienle. Appeal of Harold L. Jarvis and Janet R. Jarvis, His Wife

668 F.2d 740 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 11, 1982

Such language clearly reflects a primary desire to encourage pre-trial settlement. … Interstate Realty Co., 337 U.S. 535 , 69 S.Ct. 1235 , 93 L.Ed. 1524 (1949) (federal court must apply state law barring suits by corporations not qualified to do business in the state); Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Elec. Mfg.

Government of the Virgin Islands v. Charles Felix

569 F.2d 1274 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 28, 1978

At the conclusion of the hearing, the court declared that “ . . . this hearing clearly established to my mind that the defendant is competent to stand trial . . . ” 2 Meanwhile, on February 25,1977, the prosecution sought … None of these points involves definite medical or psychiatric testimony from one who is professionally qualified to pass judgment on the matter in question, and who personally examined the defendant.

McCauley v. University of the Virgin Islands

618 F.3d 232 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 18, 2010

Although the Fitchik factors were initially intended to determine Eleventh Amendment immunity, our Court has extended their use to § 1983. Callahan v. City of Philadelphia, 207 F.3d 668, 670 (3d Cir. 2000). … The record does not establish this determination and an assertion, without any analysis, is simply not enough.12 There is no limiting, constitutional construction for Paragraph R.

Pinho v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 9, 2001

After the alien had established these elements, the Attorney General had discr etion to grant or deny the relief. Id. … The adjudication of their deportability established that they had no legal right to remain in this country.

Franklin Fennell v. Carl Danberg

436 F. App'x 53 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 7, 2011

First, to the extent that Fennell sought damages from Scarborough in his official capacity, Scarborough was immune to suit. See Will v. Mich. Dep‟t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 71 (1989). … Those claims based on injuries that purportedly occurred in 2005 and 2006 are clearly time- barred.

Diego Sica-Lopez v. Attorney General United States of America

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 29, 2023

Nonetheless, we consider the denial of asylum because “an alien who fails to qualify for asylum is necessarily ineligible for withholding of removal.” Ghebrehiwot v. … Without such a showing, we agree with the agency that the evidence does not establish a basis for him to fear persecution if he were returned to Guatemala.