Case law

Frankford Hospital v. Davis

647 F. Supp. 1443 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 18, 1986

Income from funded depreciation or provider’s qualified pension fund is not used to reduce interest expense. … However, interest is allowable if paid on loans from the provider’s donor-restricted funds, the funded depreciation account, or provider’s qualified pension fund.

SATTERFIELD

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 7, 2026

Judgment on the pleadings is appropriate only where the movant clearly establishes that no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Wolfington v. … Detective Thomas’s Estate moves to dismiss on the grounds that Thomas did not draft or swear out the allegedly defective affidavit, that Plaintiff fails to overcome qualified immunity, and that Plaintiff fails to plead

Celano v. Celano

537 F. Supp. 690 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 13, 1982

This is true even when the state official is immune from civil liability. In Dennis v. … As a matter of law, this is insufficient to establish the “joint activity” requirement between Judge Moss and either defendant necessary to establish action under color of state law.

Bashinsky v. Mathews

437 F. Supp. 50 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 6, 1977

. § 37.52 provides that: “All chest roentgenograms interpreted by A readers will be submitted ... to a B reader qualified as described in section 37.51, whose interpretation will be final. … I find that the plaintiff clearly has established more than ten years of coal mine employment, and is entitled to the presumptions of the interim rules.

RP Wynstone, LP v. NEW HANOVER TOWNSHIP

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 5, 2025

Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right. Pearson v. … Therefore, these individual Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.

Pulcinella v. Ridley Township

822 F. Supp. 204 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 26, 1993

The statute by its wording exempts “any single-family house” that otherwise qualifies for the exemption. … Plaintiffs have, at best, established that Robert Pulcinella is a handicapped person entitled to the protections of the FHAA. They have established that Mr.

Jones v. WDAS FM/AM RADIO STATIONS

74 F. Supp. 2d 455 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 9, 1999

The elements a plaintiff must prove to establish a prima facie case of age or gender discrimination are: 1) plaintiff belongs to the protected class; 2) plaintiff was qualified for the position in question; and 3) plaintiff … Plaintiff has established a prima facie case of age and gender discrimination by presenting the following evidence: she is a female individual over the age of forty; she was qualified for job of GSM; and she suffered an adverse

WEINIK v. TEMPLE UNIVERSITY OF THE COMMONWEALTH SYSTEM OF HIGHER EDUCATION

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 10, 2020

In order to establish that the quasi-judicial privilege applies, the party asserting it must establish two elements: (1) the allegedly defamatory statements were issued during the regular course of judicial proceedings … The Court did not address the concept of quasi-judicial immunity or hold that a hearing that lacks procedural due process protections fails to qualify as a judicial proceeding.

ROSADO v. DUGAN

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 27, 2020

Rosado avers further that “any defense, and or affirmative defense or request for qualified immunity is futile, and shall be deemed denied and waived” and seeks “a class action suit enforcing constitutional secured rights … Further, PennDOT and the DMV are clearly state agencies and thus entitled to Eleventh Amendment protection. See 71 Pa. Stat.

ALLEN-FILLMORE v. TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 30, 2023

FTCA’s waiver of sovereign immunity. … than a mistaken judgment in a matter clearly involving choices among political, economic, and social factors.

GEDEON v. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 14, 2025

Given this, Plaintiff’s claim clearly falls within the scope of her duties as a PHS officer, and thus she is immune from it.3 Any amendment would be futile, and the Court dismisses Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant Kistler … Plaintiff’s claim would be a new context from the established Bivens caselaw.

Edwards v. Philadelphia Electric Company

371 F. Supp. 1313 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 18, 1974

. § 1983 . 2 Plaintiffs contend that pre-termination procedures should be established to allow PE’s customers an opportunity to contest the discontinuance of service. … was noted that the PUC Regulations on Tariffs, § VIII, provided : Every public utility that [imposes] penalties upon its customers for failure to pay bills promptly shall provide in its filed tariffs a rule setting forth clearly

Boehmer v. United States

414 F. Supp. 766 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 23, 1976

Zawrotny, Esquire, clearly distinguishes the present action from the silent record line of cases. Judge Rosenn described a silent record in Government' of Virgin Islands v. … Walker , 422 At the hearing held on this matter, petitioner did not introduce any evidence to establish a possible conflict of interest in this case.

Litz v. City of Allentown

896 F. Supp. 1401 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 18, 1995

Gamble, 429 U.S. at 106 & n. 14, 97 S.Ct. at 292 & n. 14. [7] In Colburn II, the Third Circuit established that a plaintiff in a prison suicide case has the burden of establishing three elements: (1) the detainee had a "particular … Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity, "shielding them from civil damages liability as long as their actions could reasonably have been thought consistent with the rights

Gniotek v. City of Philadelphia

630 F. Supp. 827 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 7, 1986

Joseph Alvaro, who was in charge of the Vice Squad in the Northwest Police Division, testifying for the government stated that during the period November 1982 and March 1983, Gioffre collected payments from liquor licensed establishments … Post-Termination Hearing Plaintiff police officers are afforded post-termination remedies which clearly exceed the minimum requirements approved by the Supreme Court in Loudermill. 105 S.Ct. at 1496 .

In Re Philadelphia Athletic Club, Inc.

20 B.R. 328 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 27, 1982

These elements do not, however, establish an exclusive standard. … For example, section 157 provides generally that before an attorney can be appointed to represent a trustee he must qualify as a disinterested person. 11 U.S.C. § 556 .

In Re Paoli RR Yard PCB Litigation

706 F. Supp. 358 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 28, 1988

In regard to the liver effects noted among PCB workers, the Profile states they "are inconsistent and not clearly associated with clinically detectable liver disease." … Nesbit's curriculum vita that would qualify him to testify as an expert in this area.

Estate of Booker v. Greater Philadelphia Health Action, Inc.

10 F. Supp. 3d 656 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 31, 2014

Mount Vernon Neighborhood Health Ctr., 403 F.3d 76, 81-82 (2d Cir.2005) (holding § 233(0 “establishes additional certification opportunities for federally funded health centers beyond those granted by § 233(c)” and thus does … Booker qualifies as a patient under applicable HRSA policy because she established a patient-provider relationship with GPHA by accessing care at a GPHA facility.

District Council v. Seatrain Lines, Inc.

377 F. Supp. 1278 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 12, 1973

Here, the area of controversy is clearly delineated. … Specifically, the defendants suggest that their activities were implementations of an existing approved agreement and therefore immune from antitrust penalties. Section 15, Shipping Act, supra. Cf. Hughes Tool Co. v.

Chalfin v. Beverly Enterprises, Inc.

741 F. Supp. 1162 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 26, 1989

In accordance with Title XIX, the federal government reimburses qualifying states for a portion of expenditures made by such states for certain medical care and services provided to eligible recipients by qualified providers … In order for a state to qualify for federal reimbursements, the state must establish an approved state plan for medical assistance which meets established federal guidelines.