Case law

Harrison v. Nissan Motor Corp

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 15, 1997

As explained in the text, the FTC regulations were promulgated only with the Magnuson-Moss Act in mind, but the Lemon Law requires that qualifying mechanisms comply with the FTC regulations. … no such exhaustion obligation, reasoning that the Lemon Law is a consumer statute that imposes burdens on manufacturers, but not on claimants, and that the regulations promulgated under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act clearly

Government of the Virgin Islands v. Fonseca

274 F.3d 760 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 12, 2001

Bornn was "an eminently qualified and well respected lawyer," Fonseca, 119 F.Supp. 2d at 535, she had not previously handled a criminal case, let alone a homicide. … Nevertheless, the evidence here established that one or both of the defendants assaulted Tariq with a "billy club" and possibly chemical mace before he was stabbed.

United States v. Cummings

156 F. App'x 438 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 19, 2005

Hall clearly stated and explained his belief that the 6 substance seized at the airport contained cocaine base. … As a qualified expert, Hilton did not need to participate in the operation.

Zheng v. Atty Gen USA

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 11, 2009

Indeed, two of the petitioners . . . clearly set forth that they intended to pursue their adjustment applications before the USCIS. … (a)(1), clearly precludes her from seeking adjustment of status before an IJ. And, based on that regulation, the BIA here denied her motion to reconsider on jurisdictional grounds.

United States v. Jones

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 23, 2009

At that point, the jury selection process had taken well over one month, the District Court had pre-qualified approximately forty potential jurors out of a pool of approximately 360 based on a detailed questionnaire, the … Clearly, the Government devoted substantial time and resources in developing its case for trial.

United States v. Robert Merz

396 F. App'x 838 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 12, 2010

session be excluded.8 Other Circuits have held that, because proffer agreements are interpreted in light of contract law principles, a provision allowing for derivative use is valid so long as the proffer letter clearly … The charged offenses were proscribed by “chapter 110 of title 18, United States Code” qualifying this as “a criminal case in which the defendant is accused of an offense of child molestation.” Fed. R. Evid. 414.

United States v. Pitt

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 1, 1999

The government asserts that the proof established venue. We need not address the issue of venue in this case given the time of the initial objection. United States v. … Section 853(a)(1) provides for the forfeiture of "any property constituting, or derived from, any proceeds the person obtained, directly or indirectly, as a result of [a qualifying drug offense]." 17 In imposing sentence

United States v. Thomas Shannon

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 1, 2017

There can, of course, be more than one person who qualifies as a leader or organizer of a criminal association or conspiracy. U.S.S.G. Manual § 3B1.1, cmt. n.4. … Contrary to Shannon’s claim, the District Court here did not clearly err in making specific factual findings that he was an organizer or leader of the drug trafficking conspiracy in New Jersey.

United States v. Zgrzepski

323 F. App'x 177 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 23, 2009

Officer Walsh also was able to see Greenstein’s face clearly on several occasions when Greenstein looked back. As he was closing in, Officer Walsh got caught on a fence and Greenstein escaped. … Bamberger, 460 F.2d 1277, 1278 (3d Cir. 1972) (determining evidence proving defendant served as getaway driver for bank robbery was sufficient to establish guilt for aiding and abetting).

United States v. Hsu

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 26, 1998

We established its validity in United States v. Berrigan, 482 F.2d at 190, where we held that legal impossibility is a defense to certain crimes of attempt. … He meant merely to allay any fears that the government would use the EEA to police clearly _________________________________________________________________ 17.

DeSousa v. Reno

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

Although DeSousa's convictions qualified as aggravated felonies, see 8 U.S.C. … Thus, the Supreme Court in American-Arab clearly rejected the interpretation of S 242(g) that the Attorney General and INS advance here.

Bill Gray Enterprises, Inc. Employee Health & Welfare Plan Ex Rel. Bill Gray Enterprises, Inc. v. Gourley

248 F.3d 206 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 26, 2001

(6)- To establish and communicate pr ocedures to determine whether a medical child support order is qualified under ERISA Sec. 609. … ERISA health plans must provide participants with a plan document that clearly explains coverage.

Berkshire Fashions, Inc. v. The M v. Hakusan Ii, Her Engines Boilers Etc. In Rem Canopus Ship-Holding S.A., Nippon Yusen Kaisha, Showa Kaiun, Air-Sea Transport Inc., Orient Star Shipping (Usa) Inc., Y.F.K. Cargo Service, Inc. A/K/A Y.F.K. Air Cargo Service Inc., Global Traffic Systems Inc., and J.O v. Enterprises, Inc., Global Traffic Systems and Jo-Lin Hauling, Inc., Third-Party v. Carbro Construction Corp., and the City of Linden, N.J., Third-Party

954 F.2d 874 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 23, 1992

---, 111 S.Ct. 2071, 2077 , 114 L.Ed.2d 649 (1991). 27 Despite the veneration accorded the statement that a contract must be "wholly" maritime for a court to assert admiralty jurisdiction over it, courts have repeatedly qualified … Berkshire that, regardless of the ambiguous language of the Bill of Lading, the goods would be transported by rail from Los Angeles to New York. 37 However, the evidence considered by the district court was insufficient to establish

Lambert v. Blackwell

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 29, 1997

discovery of Richard Kleinhans was not granted; Error not to grant a mistrial when the prosecution withheld evidence that a jergo was discarded and that they were aware of its location; Error to qualify … Whether, in fact, state case law exists which establishes unequivocally that state relief is precluded would depend on the particular facts of the case.

Nicholas Kuhar v. Petzl Co

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 13, 2022

Because the District Court had previously stricken Plaintiffs’ expert report, the Magistrate Judge concluded that Plaintiffs, without the expert report, could not establish that the bolt was defective. … Under Federal Rule of Evidence 702: A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if: (a) the expert

Estate Rose v. Commissioner IRS

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 26, 1996

D'Ambrosio clearly fails this requirement that all title, enjoyment, and possession of the transferred property be unequivocally halted. … To the contrary, it was precisely the tax court's awareness of the economic realities of a retained interest transaction that led it to follow well-established law.

DeBlasio v. Zoning Board of Adjustment

53 F.3d 592 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 1, 1995

Though we have yet to clearly define the category of property interests protected by the concept of substantive due process, in Bello v. … The majority falters, however, when it turns to the determination of exactly what property interests will qualify for substantive due process protection.

Hudson United Bank v. LiTenda Mortgage Corp.

142 F.3d 151 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 15, 1998

Our cases establish that we have appellate jurisdiction over the dismissal order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. S 1291. See Carr v. … Remands authorized by S 1367(c) may be entered only when federal subject matter jurisdiction has been affirmatively established, via 28 U.S.C.

United States v. Smith

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 6, 1996

of conspiracy to which he pleaded guilty and to prove facts establishing the second conspiracy as well. … How he could do either, without access to the proof on which the government proposed to rely and without the ability to offer immunity to prospective witnesses, is not readily apparent.

Harrow v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America

279 F.3d 244 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 30, 2002

Because the Harrows took no steps beyond an initial telephonic inquiry, the District Court held that plaintiff did not qualify for the futility exception. Id. … Harrow does not allege facts that, if proven, establish a breach of fiduciary duty independent of the denial of benefits (e.g., selling preferred stock at an undervalued price).