Case law

Buhl v. Cooksey

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 1, 2000

We realize, of course, that the r ecord establishes that Buhl had represented himself befor e. In addition, Buhl was clearly "street-smart," and had some technical legal knowledge. … At a subsequent pre-trial hearing, defendant renewed his request to "assist" counsel at his trial rather than conduct his own defense because he realized he was not qualified to proceed pro se.

Larry Marshak v. Michael Branch, D/B/A Insight Talent Agency, Inc., D/B/A Insight Talent Agency, & Third Party v. Willie B. Pinkney, Third Party Larry Marshak v. Michael Branch, D/B/A Insight Talent Agency, Inc., D/B/A Insight Talent Agency, & Third Party and Count Basie Theatre Michael McHarris L & M Productions Atlantis Casino Hotel Atlantis Cabaret Theatre Whoot Newspaper v. Willie B. Pinkney, Third Party

980 F.2d 727 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 7, 1992

Further, the order, which is five pages in length and contains the findings of the court on each of the factors considered by the court, does not qualify as a judgment. … the amount of attorneys' fees is clearly spurious.

United States v. Gaydos

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 14, 1997

Gaydos concedes that Russell clearly stands for the proposition that renting real estate is an activity which affects interstate commerce within the meaning of § 844(i). … First, the record clearly demonstrates that all tenants had vacated the house. Indeed, the property was unfit for human habitation.

In Re Federal Mogul-Global Inc. T & N Limited Committee of Equity Security Holders of Federal-Mogul Corporation v. Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors

348 F.3d 390 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 31, 2003

Equity Committee from [sic] being able to obtain adequate financial advice," (2) that the Bankruptcy Code does not authorize the imposition of a cap on financial professionals' compensation, and (3) that the Bankruptcy Court clearly … It is well established that "[i]dentical words used in different parts of the same act are intended to have the same meaning." Barnhart v.

Boyle v. County of Allegheny

139 F.3d 386 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 23, 1998

The Branti Court was clearly dissatisfied with the categorical approach enunciated in Elrod, which distinguished between "policymaking" and "nonpolicymaking" positions, and sought to clarify that test. 445 U.S. at 518. … To this end, Elrod, Branti and their progeny have established certain principles of law which constitute the general parameters by which the analysis must be guided.

United States v. Stelmokas

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 12, 1996

Of course, they will not be clearly erroneous if supported by clear, unequivocal, and convincing evidence. … The Supreme Court established the current test in Kungys v.

United States v. Smith

123 F.3d 140 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 19, 1997

The Advisory Committee notes to Rule 6 clearly support this conclusion. … Therefore, the newspapers have not established a common law right of access to the briefs or the hearing. V.

GFL Advantage Fund v. Colkitt

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

Although the court was correct that other factors clearly were contributing to the slide in prices, it was not within the court's province to weigh the evidence as a finder of fact. … Therefore, even under Grenadier's theory, GFL's short trades of National Medical qualify as a legitimate hedging strategy. 28 sales were intended not only to hedge against declining prices

Bohler-Uddeholm America, Inc. v. Ellwood Group, Inc.

247 F.3d 79 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 11, 2001

This point is not clearly defined by Pennsylvania law. … outcome, (6) the affidavit was corroborated, partially, by minutes of directors meetings (some statements Jonsson said were made match others' notations), and (7) his position and background qualified

Slavin v. Germantown Fire Ins. Co.

174 F.2d 799 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 1, 1949

The court below held that only Slavin was qualified as a party plaintiff under Rule 23(b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. to maintain the action, [21] finding as a conclusion of law that "Charles Talens is … Even if it be assumed that the policyholders would not have approved the plan had they known of Rosenlund's conduct, it was clearly not the price of the securities that caused the wrong.

McLaughlin v. Fisher

277 F. App'x 207 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 5, 2008

Section 1983 provides a right to a civil action for “the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.” 42 U.S.C. § 1983. … (continued...) 25  First, a reading of the testimony shows that Stiles could not clearly recollect whether he had spoken to Ryan or Fisher.

Eaves v. County of Cape May

239 F.3d 527 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 24, 2001

In other words, according to Eaves, post-judgment inter est accrues on an attorney's fee award "from the date establishing the right to the award, not the date of the judgment establishing its quantum." … The court stated that because the r ecord "clearly indicated" that the award of attorney's fees was entered on June 24, 1988, post- judgment interest ran from that date.

United States v. Boone

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 29, 2002

Weston and Farris were clearly accomplices in the offense of conviction and in their joint purchases of cocaine powder from Poppy. … Therefore, argues Weston, the district court's estimate of the total volume of drugs was clearly erroneous. We disagree.

United States v. Walter Hill

684 F. App'x 140 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 5, 2017

Rather, Hill argued only that it was prejudicial for the Government to show a long list of phone calls—only five or six of which were to his phone—without clearly noting that the rest of the calls didn’t involve him. … “By the use of the qualifying phrase ‘on or about', the grand jury indicates its unwillingness to pinpoint the date of the offense charged.”

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

124 F.3d 499 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 26, 1997

The EEOC also instructs that the elements of unlimited tenure must be "clearly and unmistakably met," and that "this exemption must be narrowly construed." … It further held, however, that La Salle could not establish compliance with the exemption because the decision of the state appellate court established that the term of Halpin's contracts was for one year only.

Gabriel Pemberthy v. Howard L. Beyer, Superintendent, and Robert J. Del Tufo, Attorney General of New Jersey, Rigoberto Moncada v. John J. Rafferty, Superintendent, and Robert J. Del Tufo, Attorney General of New Jersey

19 F.3d 857 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 6, 1994

After finding that Pemberthy and Moncada 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. … Id. at 442 , 105 S.Ct. at 3255 . 96 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.

United States v. Nathan

188 F.3d 190 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 18, 1999

However, the Court clearly relied on the fraud guidelines in sentencing Nathan. … He also directed a group that was a “qualified designated entity” (QDE), which meant that it had been given statutory authority to assist aliens in preparing legalization applications.

United States v. Marcellas Hoffman

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 12, 2026

Instead, the District Court moved on to ask: “Now, do we know what the maximum sentences he faces on each of these counts as of today, has that been established?” … In Peppers, we summarized “the scope of the court’s responsibility” before allowing a defendant to proceed pro se, and explained that the court must ensure that the defendant (1) has “clearly and unequivocally” expressed

Williams v. Rene

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 15, 1995

That testimony was general and did not establish a clear policy, nor did it demonstrate that Rene had been directed to bring Sia to work. … Indeed, the plaintiff's ploy in dismissing Rene from the suit was clearly intended to focus the jury's attention on the deep pocket defendant, Esso.

Smith v. Natl Collegiate

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 16, 1998

In our view, a fair reading of the complaint establishes that it asserts an action for damages under Title IX. See Franklin v. Gwinnett County Pub. … The Rehabilitation Act states that [n]o otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States, as defined in section 706(8) of this title, shall, solely by reason of her or his disability