Case law

Stephen P. Lasser v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company

344 F.3d 381 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 18, 2003

Lasser did not qualify for disability benefits, we first determine what is his "regular occupation," as the Policy leaves this term undefined. Reliance argues that "regular occupation" is broad, indeed generic. … Lasser was told not to perform; and (d) neither stress nor future disabilities could establish Dr.

John M. Watz v. Zapata Off-Shore Company, Defendant-Appellee-Cross v. Eaton Yale & Towne, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Appellee-Cross v. Campbell Chain Company, Fourth-Party Defendant-Appellant-Cross

431 F.2d 100 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 7, 1970

We conclude that the district court's finding that sufficient care had not been used is not clearly erroneous. … And Imbrovek's invitation to doubt the test of locality alone seems qualified by Rohde. 16 Of three analogous cases which we have discovered, only one refers to the problem. In Simpson Timber Co. v.

Weiser Law Firm P.C. v. Michael Hartleib

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 26, 2024

the case, writing: “[W]e certainly appreciate Plaintiffs’ argument that Hartleib should not be permitted to gallivant across the country, inserting himself into litigations in which Plaintiffs are involved, and then be immune … shows that the court abused its discretion.66 A party may show an abuse of discretion by demonstrating that “the court’s decision was arbitrary, fanciful or clearly unreasonable.”67 63 Schanne v.

Charles Adler v. Gruma Corporation

135 F.4th 55 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 16, 2025

Here, clearly, the SDDA and undisputed facts show Plaintiffs contracted with Defendant to “perform work” by distributing Defendant’s food products. … Arts, Inc., 717 F.3d 141, 148 (3d Cir. 2013) (“To demonstrate an abuse of discretion, an appellant must show that the District Court’s decision was arbitrary, fanciful or clearly unreasonable.”

United States v. Paster

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 19, 1999

Also, the term "reflective" used in Marcello clearly imports the concept of "thoughtful," the antonym of "thoughtless." … offense,' . . . the factfinding underlying that departure must be established at least by clear and convincing evidence."

United States v. Streeval

70 F. App'x 646 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 21, 2003

As a consequence, Streeval’s claim that the evidence does not qualify under the business records exception to the hearsay rule is irrelevant. … Accordingly, we conclude Streeval has not demonstrated the District Court’s findings were clearly erroneous. C.

Francis v. Reno

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 16, 2001

He argues that the offense is a misdemeanor under Pennsylvania law and therefore cannot qualify as a felony for purposes of the INA. … The court found that the government must establish recklessness or criminal negligence. Id.

United States v. Cosme Oidac

486 F. App'x 318 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 9, 2012

As Oidac notes, “[c]ourts have been seriously troubled by delays in revocation proceedings of far shorter than 12 years.” 7 Nevertheless, a long delay is not sufficient by itself to establish a Due Process violation if … A district court commits procedural error when it bases the sentence on “clearly erroneous facts.” Gall, 552 U.S. at 51.

United States v. Knox

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 8, 1994

This motion was made during the new briefing schedule established by us on November 17, 1993. … Only a minuscule fraction of all pictures of minor children will be sufficiently sexually suggestive and unnaturally focused on the genitalia to qualify as lascivious.

United States v. Andrea Forsythe

711 F. App'x 674 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 12, 2017

Section 844(i) as applied to 2 Forsythe is a constitutional exercise of power under the Commerce Clause because, among other things, it clearly regulates economic activity and contains … In Jones, the Supreme Court held that “an owner-occupied residence not used for any commercial purpose does not qualify as property ‘used in’ commerce or commerce-affecting activity; arson of such a dwelling, therefore,

Cipla Ltd v. Amgen Inc

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 16, 2019

Therefore, although we must read a contract as a whole and in accordance with other provisions, the notwithstanding clause clearly signals precedence. … admits to infringing”). 10 10 Because we consider the context and the clear language of the Settlement Agreement, it is unnecessary for us to rely on canons such at the last antecedent rule or the series-qualifier

Taylor v. Phoenixville Sch Dst

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 18, 1999

Rieger, agreed that during Taylor's hospitalization, she "clearly had paranoid delusions" and was hyperactive and psychotic. … If there has ever been a legal term of art, "disabled" certainly qualifies.

National Labor Relations Board v. Attleboro Associates, Ltd.

176 F.3d 154 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 30, 1999

The circumstances clearly are different here inasmuch as Attleboro’s charge nurses initiate a progressive disciplinary process, and their decisions to write up a CNA become a permanent part of the CNA’s personnel file and … employee, who (i) has completed the course of specialized intellectual instruction and study described in clause (iv) of paragraph (a), and (ii) is performing related work under the supervision of a professional person to qualify

United States v. Denis Kelliher

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 9, 2021

because two of the alleged victims—Jeff McCoun and Frank Martins—do not qualify as victims under the Sentencing Guidelines. … established requirement”); Am.

Walker v. City of Camden

57 F. App'x 943 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 30, 2003

While conceding that “Walker’s statements are clearly within the public interest,” 31a, the Court found that the speech was nonetheless unprotected because the Milan … We also agree with the District Court that Walker, a temporary employee who failed to take and pass the requisite competitive exam for the Assistant Business Administrator position, did not show that he was “qualified”

Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

790 F.2d 289 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 30, 1986

These letters clearly recognize EPA’s failure to promulgate the section 405 rules. … A certification that the POTW has an approved local pretreatment program or qualifies for the exception to this requirement found at paragraph (d) of this section. (v) Sludge Management Certification.

William Brennan v. William Paterson College

492 F. App'x 258 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 14, 2012

The WPU Defendants further contended that private persons cannot assert a right of action under the Cable Act and that Gorski and Miller were entitled to qualified 6 The District Court’s November 3, 2011 order did not … A plaintiff must establish three elements to have standing: (1) the plaintiff must have suffered an injury in fact—an invasion of a legally protected interest which is (a) concrete and particularized and (

Taylor v. Phoenixville Sch. Dist.

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 18, 1999

Rieger, agreed that during Taylor's hospitalization, she "clearly had paranoid delusions" and was hyperactive and psychotic. … If there has ever been a legal term of art, "disabled" certainly qualifies.

Hull v. Kyler

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 25, 1999

, the state supreme court, in silently denying Hull's petition, gave no indication that it was invoking this "qualifier." … Stamey had been pressed even slightly on the qualified and equivocal nature of his report's conclusions.

Kona Technology Corp., Plaintiff-Counter Cross-Appellee v. Southern Pacific Transportation Co. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co., Defendants-Cross Defendants-Counter Appellees-Cross and Chevron Chemical Co., Defendants-Cross Claimant-Third Party Plaintiff-Counter Appellee-Cross v. Spcsl Corporation, Third Party Defendant- Defendant- Counter Appellee-Cross

225 F.3d 595 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 13, 2000

Based on our review of the voluminous record, the district court's factual finding is not "clearly erroneous" and thus shall remain undisturbed. See Gebreyesus v. F.C. … Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 589-90 , 113 S.Ct. 2786 , 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993), because Sayre's credentials adduced at trial establish that he was qualified to render expert testimony.