Case law

Helco, Inc. v. First National City Bank

470 F.2d 883 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 27, 1972

He ultimately disposed of the case by holding that the defendant, by establishing a branch office in the islands and conducting a banking business there, had waived the immunity, if any, afforded by Section 94. … So our question in this respect is, did defendant by qualifying for the limited purpose of doing trust business in Illinois, intend to waive its right to be sued in a transaction which on its face does not purport to grow

Walker v. Horn

385 F.3d 321 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 28, 2004

It is have not briefed the issue of unclear from Walker’s brief whether the qualified immunity, to which … immunity as a matter of law.

Nederland Shipping Corp v. United States

18 F.4th 115 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 16, 2021

Following the two-step inquiry established more than a half-century ago in Kossick v. … Cir. 2015) (Section 1908(e) “clearly provides authority in the Coast Guard to simply hold the ship in port until legal proceedings are completed.”); see also Angelex Ltd. v.

Donald M. Peterson v. Caspar W. Weinberger, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, Defendants-Third-Party v. James E. Peterson, Third-Partydefendant

508 F.2d 45 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 27, 1975

Immunity from Liability 17 The defendants urged the district court to dismiss Dr. Peterson's amended complaint for tort liability on the ground of official immunity. … This Court held that the overwhelming evidence established that Dr.

In Re: Grand Jury

286 F.3d 153 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 5, 2002

It instead established a rebuttable presumption in favor of grand jury subpoenas. … See, e.g., Pansy, 23 F.3d at 789-91 (establishing test for modification of protective orders).

In re Orthopedic Bone Screw Product Liability Litigation

264 F.3d 344 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 31, 2001

Because the record establishes the Court’s lack of jurisdiction, we will affirm. … Such intentional conduct, however, is explicitly exempted from the FTCA’s waiver of sovereign immunity. 21 b.

In Re Cendant Corp

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 16, 2003

Courts have wrestled with the idea of affording opinion work product absolute immunity from discovery. … McGraw gave to Wood during a private consultation with Wood’s attorney clearly calls for attorney work product protection. In retaining Dr.

A.L. Blades & Sons, Inc. v. Yerusalim

121 F.3d 865 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 1, 1997

Under the Supreme Court’s test, the Commonwealth was required to establish that non-Pennsylvania residents “constitute a peculiar source of the evil at which the statute is aimed.” … If they do not qualify as a “peculiar source" in 1990, then the Commonwealth cannot argue the nonresidents satisfy the test for the other years where the job displacement figures were lower. .

Bruesewitz v. Wyeth Inc.

561 F.3d 233 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 27, 2009

Enacted in 1986, the Vaccine Act established a national vaccine program to “achieve optimal prevention of human infectious diseases through immunization and to achieve optimal prevention against adverse reactions to vaccines … The District Court did not clearly explain the basis of its summary judgment *252 decision.

UNITED STATES of America, v. Frank SERAFINI; United States of America, v. Frank Serafini

233 F.3d 758 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 1, 2000

In addition, he helped to establish a fund to defray the cost of a bone marrow transplant for a man suffering from leukemia. See id. at 209. … See A. at 3337-38 (District Court’s statement that the jury could not consider the conduit evidence to establish Serafi-m's knowledge). .

Euster v. Eagle Downs Racing Association

677 F.2d 992 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 17, 1982

The Midcal Court stressed that the state simply authorized price-setting and enforced the prices established by private parties. … These facts are clearly distinguishable from the case before us.

Fmc Corporation v. United States Department of Commerce Ronald Brown, Secretary of Commerce, in His Official Capacity United States of America

29 F.3d 833 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 5, 1994

In January 1942, an executive order established the WPB. … Fortunately, however, the case law provides us with criteria for identifying those who qualify as “operators” under CERCLA.

Mitchell v. Commission on Adult Entertainment Establishments of Delaware

12 F.3d 406 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 29, 1993

Comm’n on Adult Entertainment Establishments, C.A. No. 85-735 MMS (D.Del. Nov. 8, 1989). … This is clearly a suit against a state agency, and the Commission was entitled to eleventh amendment immunity. Will v. Michigan Dept. of State Police, 491 U.S. 58 , 109 S.Ct. 2304 , 105 L.Ed.2d 45 (1989).

Pareja v. Attorney General of the United States

615 F.3d 180 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 29, 2010

The statute is clearly written in the singular, and it speaks without equivocation: hardship may be established by reference to but one qualifying relative. … On the one hand, by citing how many qualifying relatives the Recinas petitioner had, the BIA simply might have meant that the Recinas petitioner had established hardship to each individual qualifying relative because her

Kleinknecht v. Gettysburg College

989 F.2d 1360 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 31, 1993

The court held, however, that student volunteer trainer Traci Moore would be shielded from liability, and that the College would also be immune because “the statutory context does not ‘clearly indicate[ ]’ ... that the word … Her actions or omissions are pertinent to this case only insofar as they could establish or refute the College’s vicarious liability, which is not dependent on her immunity status under the statute.

Northwestern Ohio Administrators, Inc. v. Walcher & Fox, Inc., Defendant-Appellee/third-Party

270 F.3d 1018 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 6, 2001

In Severino, the limitation was clearly spelled out at the top of the signature page of the contract. … More importantly, the immunity established by the Supreme Court in Atkinson and expanded in Complete Auto Transit, Inc., v.

Edgar v. Avaya Inc

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 26, 2007

Id. 10 the trustee to invest in a particular stock, then the trustee is “immune from judicial inquiry.” Id. … [is] invested primarily in qualifying employer securities.” Id.

Drew Whitley v. County of Allegheny

402 F. App'x 713 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 22, 2010

Whitley also takes issue with the District Court’s ruling that the individual Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. … Whitley incorrectly characterizes the District Court's decision as impermissibly extending the qualified immunity defense to Allegheny County.

United States v. State of Delaware Robert W. Chastant, Director of the Division of Revenue, State of Delaware

958 F.2d 555 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 12, 1992

But both are distinguishable because, according to those courts, the taxing authorities did not intend to establish mandatory pass-throughs. … See also 30 Del.Code Ann. § 5507 (Michie Supp 1990), which provides that certain tax rebates are to be paid to the consumers who qualify for them.

Grant v. City of Pittsburgh

98 F.3d 116 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 18, 1996

The Court in Anderson held that to defeat qualified immunity it is not sufficient that the right at issue be clearly established as a general matter. … violated clearly established federal law."