Case law

United States for the Use of Colorado Custom Rock v. G&C Fab Con LLC

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 5, 2025

In its brief, G&C relies on an assortment of case law, much of it unpublished and most of it outside of New Jersey, to support its view that the contract clearly entitled it to attorneys’ fees. … In Colorado, 6 a party seeking damages must establish them “with reasonable certainty by a preponderance of the evidence.” Pomerantz v. McDonald’s Corp., 843 P.2d 1378, 1381 (Co. 1993) (emphasis omitted).

22 Fair empl.prac.cas. 638, 22 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 30,803 John Sikora, Otto Kalmbach, Frederick Meyer, Vladimir Honeiser v. American Can Company, a Corporation Organized and Existing Under the Laws of the State of New Jersey and Authorized to Do Business in New Jersey

622 F.2d 1116 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 31, 1980

The Supreme Court held in McMann that a plan established before passage of the Act in 1967 was not a subterfuge. … has established.

United States v. Andrew Alexander

710 F. App'x 105 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 27, 2017

Furthermore, the District Court’s preponderance finding was not clearly erroneous. … Alexander’s own statement to the police established his presence in the second-floor bedroom where the cocaine and crack cocaine were discovered.

Pemberthy v. Beyer

19 F.3d 857 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 16, 1994

After finding that Pemberthy and Moneada had made out a prima facie case, the district court held that the state had failed to establish a legitimate justification for its peremptory challenges. … In light of this analysis, we do not think that a classification based on the ability to speak a foreign language can qualify' for “strict” or “heightened” review.

Mbube v. Attorney General

241 F. App'x 813 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 18, 2007

To qualify for protection under CAT, an applicant must “establish that it is more likely than not that he or she would be tortured if removed to the proposed country of removal.” 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c)(2). … An applicant must establish by objective evidence that he is likely to be tortured in the future. Zubeda v. Ashcroft, 333 F.3d 463, 469 (3d Cir. 2003).

Humphreys v. DEA

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 17, 1996

Humphreys was named as an unindicted co- conspirator in the conspiracy count and received immunity in return for his testimony against Larson. … However, the DEA did not establish that the pharmacy or pharmacies patronized by Larson had such a system in place during the relevant time period.

C.H. Ex Rel. Z.H. v. Oliva

195 F.3d 167 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 22, 1999

s speech here, the student speech at issue in Chandler was clearly "tolerated" speech, triggering a higher level of scrutiny of the restrictions involved. … The plaintiff misconstrues the requirements of the Establishment Clause. To determine whether the defendants' conduct violated the Establishment Clause, we continue to apply the three-part test set out in Lemon.

Marcus v. Township of Abington

38 F.3d 1367 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 27, 1994

Congress vested us with appellate jurisdiction to review Colorado River abstention/stay orders only in those cases where we conclude that the state and federal proceedings at issue are, in fact, parallel and, therefore, qualify … B. 66 The federal and state proceedings at issue here clearly are not "parallel" under Colorado River. As a general matter, a Sec. 1983 action may be brought in either a state or federal forum.

Society Hill Civic Association v. Harris

632 F.2d 1045 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 25, 1980

P. 12(c). 26 Under Rule 12(c), like Rule 12(b)(6) (dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted), judgment will not be granted 27 unless the movant clearly establishes that no material issue of … Rather, we leave it for consideration by the district court in the first instance if, on remand, this claim is reasserted. 11 As noted above, the Association has claimed on appeal that the tenants do not qualify as displaced

Board of Trustees of the District No. 15 MacHinists Pension Fund v. Kahle Engineering Corporation, a New Jersey Corporation

43 F.3d 852 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 30, 1994

The court noted that the pension plan may qualify as an installment contract, under which claims do not accrue until each payment comes due. … The majority's construction of the MPPAA is clearly inconsistent with the congressional goal of safeguarding the financial integrity of the multiemployer plan.

Ngo v. INS

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 24, 1999

However, the Court qualified its holding, recognizing that the case did not involve "the constitutionality of `indefinite' or `permanent' detention with no prospect of release." Id . at 1450. … A decision to detain will clearly delineate the factors presented by the alien in support of his release, and the reasons for the District Director's decision.

No. 02-4020

401 F.3d 143 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 10, 2005

MDL 1203 Fee & Cost Account 18 Pretrial Order No. 467 established the MDL 1203 Fee & Cost Account. … A final award would have to wait until the viability of the Settlement Agreement had been firmly established.

Miguel Paz Hernandez v. Attorney General United States

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 3, 2021

Three of these challenges — Paz’s arguments (a) that the BIA engaged in improper “appellate fact finding” by relying on a fact clearly established in the record, Paz Br. 15; (b) that the agency did not give the proper … See A.R. 24-26 (IJ erred in excluding testimony of expert before his qualifications could be established). Given the issues with Dr.

Kaiser Industries Corporation, a Nevada Corporation v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation. Kaiser Industries Corporation, a Nevada Corporation v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation

515 F.2d 964 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 4, 1975

had not been met and that, therefore, the Suess patent was void for indefiniteness. 39 First, it ascertained that the claims of the patent do not properly measure the invention: 40 (T)he avoidance of deep penetration is clearly … The appellants cannot regain the phrase or qualify the effect of their acquiescence through the affidavits. Parke, Davis & Co. v. American Cyanamid Co., 207 F.2d 571, 574 (6th Cir. 1953).

Ispat/Inland, Inc. v. Director OWCP

422 F. App'x 149 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 6, 2011

However, the ALJ also assessed testimony proffered by five medical witnesses and concluded Curtis had satisfied his burden of establishing legal pneumoconiosis. … Quite clearly, the ALJ did not discredit Dr. Fino’s testimony simply because it posited cigarette smoke as the sole underlying cause of Curtis’ condition.

Fisseha Gebrmaryam v. Attorney General United States

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 6, 2019

To qualify for withholding of removal, he was required to demonstrate that it is “more likely than not” that he would suffer persecution on account of one of the enumerated grounds. See Wu v. … (Br. 4, 16.) 6  Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that the IJ’s adverse credibility finding was not clearly erroneous.

LaFata v. Raytheon Company

147 F. App'x 258 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 12, 2005

Clearly it did not. There was no “change in [RE&C’s] Company structure” occasioned by that sale. … The merger was clearly a “reorganization” that qualified La Fata for severance if it resulted in termination.

George Cordova v. Atty Gen USA

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 10, 2012

240A(b)(1) is available to an alien who has been physically present in the United States for at least 10 years, has been a person of good moral character, has not been convicted of a specified criminal offense, and has established … reminded Cordova and his counsel that Cordova would be required to prove that he had been in the United States for 10 years, had been a person of good moral character for 10 years, and then the focus would be on his qualifying

United States v. Kemp

500 F.3d 257 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 27, 2007

The next day, Umbrell approved Kemp’s request to be pre-qualified for a $227,000 mortgage. … That response, which was uncon-tradicted on the record, clearly points to the juror’s view of the evidence.

United States v. Zwick

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 15, 1999

The Fosnight project was clearly a significant transaction within the intended reach of the statute. … Note 6 ("For example, to qualify under subsection (b)(2), the defendant must have notified authorities of his intention to enter a plea of guilty at a sufficiently early point in the process . . . ."); United States v.