Case law

Lhamu Lama Sherpa v. Attorney General United States

603 F. App'x 92 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 18, 2015

At the outset, we note that the IJ clearly explained the reasoning supporting his adverse credibility determination. (IJ4 at 20–26). … For example, a requisite element of whether an applicant qualifies as a refugee is whether she has a subjective, well-founded fear of future persecution. 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A).

Skretvedt v. E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co.

268 F.3d 167 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 9, 2001

for incapability benefits.2 If so, the Board would determine whether the employee also qualified for T & P benefits. … Schiff, Binhammer, and Buczek also establish that Skretvedt's condition existed before his termination from DuPont in February 1995.

Morton International, Inc. v. A.E. Staley Manufacturing Company

343 F.3d 669 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 21, 2003

Whether this evidence alone is sufficient to establish control is another matter. … "Dirty Mercury" Transactions 50 Morton asserts that Tenneco shipped its own "dirty mercury" to the plant for processing into usable mercury, a transaction which clearly qualifies Tenneco for "arranger liability."

Carlos Chang-Cruz v. Attorney General United States

659 F. App'x 114 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 24, 2016

Under this approach, we look “to whether ‘the state statute defining the crime of conviction’ categorically fits 1 Under an alternative route, a state conviction qualifies as an aggravated felony if it … First, neither we nor the parties have uncovered any case clearly holding that distribution and dispensing are alternative elements, but we have found suggestions to the contrary—namely, cases that appear to treat distribution

United States v. Gregory Jackson

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 24, 2020

SENTENCING 4 The Sentencing Guidelines provide that “if the defendant clearly demonstrates acceptance of responsibility for his offense,” the offense level decreases by two. U.S. … Jackson does not meet the requirements set forth in guideline section 3E1.1A to qualify for an offense reduction for acceptance of responsibility.

United States v. McFadden Carroll Garwin AKA William James AKA Sunshine. Appeal of Carroll Garwin McFadden

630 F.2d 963 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 15, 1980

WEBB: That’s clearly evidenced by what the defendant is saying. “The government has a concern that if the case is forced to trial in this posture, that there will be no effective representation by competent counsel. … At the hearing described under part (2) of this sentence, the defendant complained that “I haven’t been given a decent counsel,” even though the record shows that both appointed counsel were fully qualified.

Dowling v. Isthmian S.S. Corporation

184 F.2d 758 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 15, 1950

This untrammeled spirit was early exemplified here in a case where a statute established a right, but provided no machinery to carry it to completion. The. procedure was established by the court. … It affords interesting corroboration of the view generally held by those qualified to speak that for most purposes the former is by far the superior method.

First Liberty Inv v. Nicholsberg

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 9, 1998

Thus, entirely without reference to Nicholsberg's undertaking in the Form U-4, the terms of the Agreement (committed to by both First Liberty and Nicholsberg) clearly incorporate by reference all requirements applicable to … Indeed, even in the absence of such a commitment in the Agreement, it has long been established (see, e.g., Axelrod & Co. v.

Meadows v. Anchor Longwall & Rebuild, Inc.

306 F. App'x 781 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 13, 2009

“An abuse of discretion arises when the District Court's decision rests upon a clearly erroneous finding of fact, an errant conclusion of law or an improper application of law to fact.” … First, to qualify as an expert under the rule, under our liberal standard, a witness must possess sufficient qualifications in the form of knowledge, skills and training.

Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Brown

226 F. App'x 153 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 21, 2007

A motion for judgment on the pleadings will not be granted unless the movant clearly establishes that no material issues of fact remain unresolved, and that the movant 3 … Moreover, voiding the “other household vehicle” exclusion would empower insureds to collect UIM benefits multiplied by the number of insurance policies on which they qualify as an insured, even though

Marjac v. Richard Trenk

380 F. App'x 142 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 14, 2010

In September 2002, the plaintiffs undertook development of Etcetera Restaurant and Flirt Nightclub “with the goal of establishing a landmark destination featuring Essex County’s trendiest new restaurant, one of New Jersey … A38. 3 In its written Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the Planning Board stated: “Since not all motivational dancers qualify as ‘go go entertainers’ the use of motivational dancers does not alone

Nour v. Atty Gen USA

210 F. App'x 204 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 28, 2006

The IJ determined that Nour had signed the form, indicating that he knew the contents of the application, which were clearly not true. … In its opinion, the BIA found that Nour would not qualify for adjustment of status because he had already been found morally unfit for such discretionary relief by the IJ.

Jonathan Valentin v. Philadelphia County Sheriffs Department

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 30, 2023

False Arrest “To state a claim for false arrest under the Fourth Amendment, a plaintiff must establish: (1) that there was an arrest; and (2) that the arrest was made without probable cause.” James v. … Leathers, 913 F.2d 1085, 1089 (4th Cir. 1990). 5 We do not address Appellees’ contention that Murphy would have been entitled to qualified immunity had the District Court determined that the force used was excessive, as

Georgine v. Amchem Products, Inc.

83 F.3d 610 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 10, 1996

For those claimants that qualify, the stipulation fixes a range of damages that CCR will award for each disease, and places caps both on the amount that a particular victim may recover and on the number of qualifying claims … , and up to one percent of the total number of qualified “non-malignant conditions” claims) can be found to be “extraordinary.”

Wicker v. Consolidated Rail Corp.

142 F.3d 690 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 29, 1998

Shortly after FELA's adoption, the Supreme Court began to establish the boundaries of S 5. The Court upheld the validity of S 5 in Mondou v. New York, N.H. & H.R. … But the facts of the case counsel against extracting such a clearly defined rule of law.

Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Attorney General of the United States

677 F.3d 519 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 16, 2012

The Statutes clearly advance a substantial governmental interest—protecting children from sexual exploitation by pornographers. … As a threshold matter, the statute and regulations must target businesses within a “pervasively regulated” industry to qualify for the exception. See Barlow’s, 436 U.S. at 313.

Jose Hernandez-Chavez v. Attorney General United States

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 20, 2021

§ 1229b, reasoning that he did not establish that his removal would result in an exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his sole qualifying relative, his daughter, 2 … The BIA also held that the IJ did not clearly err in finding that Hernandez-Chavez was unlikely to face torture in Mexico and was thus not entitled to CAT relief.

Ameron, Inc. v. United States Army Corps of Engineers

809 F.2d 979 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 31, 1986

Unlike the contentions advanced in Synar, however, the Army does not argue that in passing CICA Congress gave power to the executive and then took it back, and upon examination such a contention would clearly be untenable … Nixon President Nixon claimed, inter alia, that he had a qualified privilege to withhold documents sought by the prosecution in a criminal trial.

Ahmed v. Atty Gen USA

106 F. App'x 111 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 20, 2004

Credibility Determination The Attorney General has discretion to grant asylum to an alien who qualifies as a “refugee.” 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b). … Ahmed was clearly given an 8 opportunity to make arguments and submit evidence in support of his case in a “meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.”

Prometheus Radio Project v. Federal Communications Commission

373 F.3d 372 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 24, 2004

Any limitation must be clearly stated by Congress. See, e.g., Am. Hosp. Ass'n v. … The Commission's interpretation is clearly permissible.