Case law

Karas v. Jackson

582 F. Supp. 43 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 28, 1983

Jackson’s affidavit clearly establishes the contrary. The physicians and attendants did not personally confer a benefit on Dr. … Pennsylvania Hospital, 417 Pa. 486 , 208 A.2d 193 (1965), which eliminated the immunity from tort liability previously recognized in favor of public hospitals.

Holton v. Crozer-Chester Medical Center

419 F. Supp. 334 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 30, 1976

The plaintiffs contend that Crozer-Chester’s policy of requiring spousal consent for sterilizations has deprived them of rights, privileges and immunities guaranteed by the Constitution. … Similar restrictions and regulations also are required in order to qualify for Medicare and Medicaid payments. See generally 42 U.S.C. §§ 1395 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. § 1396 et seq.

Kieffer v. CPR Restoration & Cleaning Service, LLC

200 F. Supp. 3d 520 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 3, 2016

Defendants move for summary judgment on the grounds that Kieffer has failed to establish that he was a “qualified individual” under the ADA and there is no record evidence to support his remaining claims. … that he is a ‘qualified individual with a disability.’ ” Krouse v.

Cacciola v. Work N Gear

23 F. Supp. 3d 518 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 29, 2014

Because Cac-ciola suffered an adverse employment action when she was terminated, she has clearly satisfied the second element of the prima facie case. … Tramo, a witness clearly hostile to Caccio-la, also testified that Cacciola told her about the Hollitt-Edelman conversation. JA at 360. .

Moorehead v. SCHOOL DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF ALLENTOWN

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 17, 2023

“If the facts of the complaint are insufficient to establish a qualified immunity defense, the motion must fail.” Id. … “In resolving claims of qualified immunity, a court must decide: 1) whether the facts alleged or shown by a plaintiff make out a violation of a constitutional right, and 2) whether that right was clearly established at

Mraz v. County of Lehigh

862 F. Supp. 1344 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 31, 1994

Once the moving party has met the initial burden of demonstrating the absence of a genuine issue of material fact, the non-moving party must establish the existence of each element of its case. J.F. Feeser, Inc. v. … Defendants also request summary judgment on the ground that they are immune from suit. We -will not decide this argument because summary judgment on this claim is granted on substantive grounds. 2 .

Prince v. Trustees of University of Pennsylvania

282 F. Supp. 832 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 29, 1968

New Jersey clearly maintains an important interest in the administration of the decedent’s affairs. … This broad grant of immunity is qualified in the case of hospitals by the language contained in the second section of the statute: “Notwithstanding the provisions of the foregoing paragraph, any nonprofit corporation, society

Ramage v. Rescot Systems Group, Inc.

834 F. Supp. 2d 309 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 6, 2011

Ramage has failed to establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination because she is not a disabled person within the meaning of the ADA and, consequently, does not qualify for its protections. … Ramage is unable to establish that she was a qualified individual with a disability, and consequently, she cannot make out a pñma facie case for a hostile work environment based on disability discrimination.

Hess v. Weinberger

363 F. Supp. 262 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 10, 1973

The present record establishes that plaintiff will continue to meet the special earnings requirements of the Act and, depending upon his future condition, may qualify for benefits through September 30, 1976 (p. 18). … To qualify presently, he must establish a disability, as defined by the Act, beginning on or before the date of the hearing held by the Administrative Law Judge on October 10, 1972 (pp. 18, 19).

Raymond Proffitt Foundation v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

175 F. Supp. 2d 755 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 20, 2001

The Corps has established a schedule of high-level water releases several times a year for white water rafting, as well as providing picnic areas and boat launches for public use. … The Supreme Court has clearly stated that an “unequivocal expression” of the waiver of sovereign immunity must be in the text of the relevant statute for a claim to go forward. United States v.

PUTT v. TRIPADVISOR INC.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 25, 2021

Nonetheless, Defendants have not shown they are immune from liability at this stage of the litigation. … “Under the statutory scheme, an ‘interactive computer service’ qualifies for immunity so long as it does not also function as an ‘information content provider’ for the portion of the statement or publication at issue.”

Gainey aka Naree Abdullah v. PHILADELPHIA

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 12, 2025

As a preliminary matter, this Court previously found that the individual PPD officers were entitled to qualified immunity and that Ruiz was entitled to absolute immunity. See Gainey v. … App’x 242 (3d Cir. 2018) (“whether [ ] individual officers might be protected by qualified immunity is a separate and distinct question that does not bear on the Court’s treatment of Plaintiff’s claims against the City.

Zarrow

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 16, 2026

§ 1915(e)(2)(B) requires the Court to screen the Complaint and dismiss it if it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or seeks damages from an immune defendant. … A plaintiff commencing an action in federal court bears the burden of establishing federal jurisdiction. See Lincoln Benefit Life Co. v.

HATCHIGIAN v. WHELAN

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 29, 2025

Like other forms of official immunity, judicial immunity is an immunity from suit, not just from ultimate assessment of damages. Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 (1985). … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 815-819 (1982) (allegations of malice are insufficient to overcome qualified immunity); Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11 (1991).

FULLMAN v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 30, 2025

However, the “ultimate analysis is whether a defendant has established absolute prosecutorial immunity from a given claim.” … Even if it did not exist, Officer Dorney asserts that he is entitled to qualified immunity for his conduct.

Matin v. FULTON, FRIEDMAN & GULLACE LLP

826 F. Supp. 2d 808 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 14, 2011

In that paragraph, Matin argues that she has “clearly presented evidence that would create a genuine issue of material fact” concerning whether the debt was a “consumer debt for purposes of the FDCPA.” (Pltf.’s Resp. … To the extent that Matin argues that FF & G’s attempt to collect the debt from her personally establishes that the debt is a qualifying debt under the FDCPA, courts sitting in this district have already considered this issue

Lawrence v. United States

631 F. Supp. 631 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 29, 1982

. § 1331 , the Court must find that the claims asserted therein are “so attenuated and unsubstantial as to be absolutely devoid of merit, or clearly foreclosed by the decisions of the Supreme Court so as to leave no room … The Court does not now decide whether an award of backpay would constitute monetary damages in this case that would be impermissible under principles of sovereign immunity. 17 .

Addis v. Limited Long-Term Disability Program

425 F. Supp. 2d 610 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 30, 2006

It is whether she is able to perform the duties of “any gainful occupation for which [she is] reasonably qualified by education, experience or training.” 21 MetLife determined that Addis did not qualify for disability. … Neither MetLife nor Limited clearly defined their respective roles in the decisionmaking process.

United States v. Sample

378 F. Supp. 44 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 10, 1974

Britchkow’s testimony clearly is not worthy of belief. Lena Lee is a member of the Parkside Tennis Club. … There can be no doubt that Nash is qualified *52 to testify as to the reliability of spectogram analysis.

Tate v. Werner

68 F.R.D. 513 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 8, 1975

Accordingly, out of an abundance of caution, and regardless of the receipt of numerous letters through the machinery we had established in order to elicit comments, we issued a second order setting forth new time frames for … We have no doubts about the adequacy of representation of the plaintiff class in that suit, as many of the attorneys are well-known to this Court and are extremely well-qualified for the litigation.