Case law

United States v. Gollapudi

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 17, 1997

Moreover, it was established that the alleged withholding was never submitted to the IRS, but rather, was maintained in Gollapudi's corporate checking account. … The majority claims that the plain meaning of S 6531(4) clearly encompasses S 7202, vitiating any need for other techniques of statutory interpretation.

United States v. Alejandro Sotelo

707 F. App'x 77 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 26, 2017

The parties contest whether the District Court’s instructions in the instant case qualified as the “functional equivalent” of an instruction to begin deliberations anew. … Gonzalez Jose’s ledger of his drug transactions cannot be construed as testimonial — a “solemn declaration or affirmation made for the purpose of establishing or proving some fact.” Crawford v.

Tchernycheva v. Attorney General of the United States

230 F. App'x 231 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 3, 2007

The IJ explained to Tchernycheva that it would not support an asylum claim to suggest that she did not get into a university when there was no evidence that she had even graduated from secondary school or was otherwise qualified … However, the constellation of problems described by the Immigration Judge lead us to agree that the [petitioners] have not met their burden of proof to establish eligibility for the requested forms of relief

Government of Virgin Islands v. Lansdale

307 F. App'x 688 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 28, 2009

The Determination Order clearly does not respond to a motion to stay or a motion to compel and thus does not fall under the explicit language of § 16(a)(1)(A) or (B). … Thus, to qualify for mandamus relief, a petitioner must demonstrate “that there is (1) ‘no other adequate means’ to attain the relief sought, and (2) a right to the writ that is ‘clear and indisputable[]’ and, (3) even

In Re Fosamax (Alendronate Sodium) Products Liability Litigation

852 F.3d 268 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 22, 2017

Identification of “stress fractures” may not be clearly related to the atypical subtrochanteric fractures that have been reported in the literature. … Identification of ‘stress fractures’ may not be clearly related to the atypical subtrochanteric features that have been reported in the literature.

Price v. Delaware State Police Federal Credit Union

370 F.3d 362 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 3, 2004

Both parties make the argument that Further, the dissent contends that it is this case qualifies under the exception to somehow “too speculative” to believe that the mootness doctrine for those cases that … “‘It is The dissent’s startling the responsibility of the statement that our insistence com plainant clearly to on plaintiffs with live

Yaqin Chen v. Attorney General of the United States

622 F. App'x 155 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 22, 2015

The burden of proof is plainly on the applicant to establish eligibility for asylum. 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(B). … The transcript of her interview with Officer Perez clearly discloses that, in her capacity as a midwife, Chen assisted doctors in performing forced birth control procedures by handing the doctors equipment necessary to

Brokerage Concepts v. US Healthcare Inc (Part II)

140 F.3d 494 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 2, 1998

Healthcare is required by law to allow only qualified providers into its network,27 and chooses its providers from the set of qualified providers, it alone decides whom within that set to admit largely on the basis of a provider's … Wrongful means also include any unlawful conduct in violation of specific statutory provisions or of established public policy.

Dayhoff Inc. v. H.J. Heinz Co.

86 F.3d 1287 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 24, 1996

Clearly, this agency theory is not applicable to the facts before us. 60 We also point out that Heinz Italia and H.J. … However, we limit recovery for that fraud, if it is established, to damages.

Albert Hairston v. Roy Hendricks

578 F. App'x 122 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 3, 2014

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253. 8 an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court . . . … Instead, Each one of these people took an hour and a half to two hours to qualify when we did the voir dire.

Neurotron Inc v. Medical Serv Assoc

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 19, 2001

In each instance it engaged the services of thr ee qualified medical experts as consultants. Nothing in the r ecord suggests any deficiency in the process by which these consultants were selected. … Highmark's independent consultants wer e clearly aware that CPT was being used by health care professionals and appeared in the medical literature.

GM Corp Chevrolet v. New A.C. Chevrolet

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 27, 2001

The first three elements of an ADDCA claim are clearly established, and thus the dispositive issue is whether, in Count One, New AC sufficiently pleaded GM's failure to act in good faith, as that term is understood in the … Nonetheless, a few dozen paragraphs earlier, New AC clearly makes the requisite allegation: In paragraph 92, New AC states that GM's "refusal to permit NEW AC to establish a Volkswagen franchise. . . is in violation of the

United States v. Askari

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 8, 1998

The latter applies "only to blackmail and similar forms of extortion where there clearly is no threat of violence to person or property." USSG S 2B3.3, comment. (n.1). 17. See United States v. … Accordingly, we hold Askari could not qualify for departure under USSG S 5K2.13 because he did not commit a "non-violent offense."

United States v. Suggs

230 F. App'x 175 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 26, 2007

Evid. 702 (“If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, … them or Eppel’s testimony was “arbitrary, fanciful or clearly unreasonable.”

Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders

621 F.3d 296 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 21, 2010

The Court denied Defendants’ cross- motion which sought qualified and Eleventh Amendment immunity. Id. … Nonetheless, the point made by Judge Rodriguez establishes that what might in some imagined circumstances be “plausible” is without support in the record 3  Judge Barkett’s Powell dissent

United States v. Bradley

173 F.3d 225 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 19, 1999

The government called Williams as a witness following a grant of immunity to her. … We have reviewed these contentions and conclude that they are clearly without merit and thus we reject the contentions without further discussion. 13 III.

Louis Mickens-Thomas v. Donald Vaughn

407 F. App'x 597 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 20, 2011

This conduct resulted in Thomas‘s 3 The Board‘s requirement that Thomas participate in the ―admitter‖ part of a sex offender treatment program to qualify for parole is a retroactive application of 42 Pa. Stat. … Where a state court has ruled on the merits of a claim, habeas relief is conditioned upon concluding that a state court decision is contrary to or unreasonably applies clearly established federal law, or unreasonably determines

In Re: Grand Jury Investigation

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 21, 2001

United States, 406 U.S. 441, 453-54 (1971) (holding grand jury may override a Fifth Amendment claim only if the witness is granted immunity co-extensive with the privilege against self-incrimination). … We must "uphold the district court's decision `unless it is clearly arbitrary or without support in the record.' " United States v.

Pennsylvania Protection & Advocacy, Inc. v. Houstoun

228 F.3d 423 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 3, 2000

The Act provides funding for the states to establish independent organizations (referred to in the Act as "eligible systems") that monitor and protect the rights of the mentally ill. See 42 U.S.C. S 10803. … (PP & A) is a Pennsylvania non-profit corporation that is qualified as an "eligible system" under PAMII.

Central Pennsylvania Teamsters Pension Fund v. McCormick Dray Line, Inc.

85 F.3d 1098 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 12, 1996

Any newly hired employee shall qualify as an eligible member employee as of the first day of the month immediately following his employment if such employee meets the requirements of Subsection (B) next below. B. … Circuit’s decision in Bituminous Coal, which held that mutual mistake cannot be asserted as a defense, we have clearly endorsed the decisions of other courts of appeals in concluding that traditional contract defenses normally