Case law

United States Ex Rel. Boyance v. Myers

270 F. Supp. 734 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 10, 1967

Michaels of Cornwells Heights, County and State aforesaid, who being duly qualified, according to law, deposes and says that on or about the 13th day of July. 1961, the following goods and chattels, to wit: Blank Checks, … People of State of California, 314 U.S. 219, 236 , 62 S.Ct. 280, 290 , 86 L.Ed. 166 (1941), or those personal immunities which are “ ‘so rooted in the traditions and conscience of our people as to be ranked as fundamental

Brill v. Marandola

540 F. Supp. 2d 563 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 10, 2008

The first requirement, whether the witness is qualified as an expert, has been interpreted liberally to encompass “a broad range of knowledge, skills, and training.” In re Paoli R.R. … However, an expert may not state such hypothetical propositions as objective facts, unless such facts are clearly undisputed. The objectionable portion of Mr.

Bleznak v. C.G.S. Scientific Corp.

61 F.R.D. 493 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 29, 1973

APPROPRIATENESS OF CLASS ACTION To be maintainable as a class action, a suit must meet all the prerequisites of subdivision (a) of Rule 23 and must qualify as maintainable under one of the provisions of subdivision (b) of … However, the only case which has been called to our attention which clearly abolishes the purchaser-seller requirement for a cause of action such as this under Section 10(b) is Entel v.

Louisiana Forestry Ass'n v. Solis

889 F. Supp. 2d 711 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 20, 2012

The H-2B visa program permits employers to recruit unskilled laborers from abroad to fill positions that no qualified United States worker will accept. … H-2B visas are issued by the DHS, upon the application of a qualifying employer.

Schwartz v. Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Co.

374 F. Supp. 564 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 20, 1974

Such cooperation falls clearly within the McCarran-Ferguson Act exemption. … As a result, the essential facts necessary to support this claim of immunity have not as yet been pleaded,.

Lal v. Nix

935 F. Supp. 578 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 25, 1996

Such a finding would clearly void the judgment of the state court and violate the Rooker-Feld-man doctrine. 4 The conclusion that my decision on the merits of Lai’s claims would require me to make a prohibited review of the … Finally, the individual defendants acting in their official capacities and the board have Eleventh Amendment immunity from suits for money damages in federal court.

Stickney v. MUHLENBERG COLL. TIAA-CREF RET. PLAN

896 F. Supp. 412 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 3, 1995

. §§ 1001 , et seq., which has broad application to any employee benefit plan established or maintained by an employer engaged in commerce. 29 U.S.C.A. § 1003 (a). … The legislation sought to rectify the inadequacies in the existing law which "failed to delineate clearly a spouse's interest in an employee's pension benefits ...

Williams v. Hartford Casualty Insurance

83 F. Supp. 2d 567 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 22, 2000

The plaintiff must establish bad faith by clear and convincing evidence. See Polselli, 23 F.3d at 750 . … The PSTCA generally provides a procedure whereby a tort claim can be instituted against a municipality for actions that fit into one of the specified exceptions to governmental immunity. See City of Philadelphia v.

PACIULETE

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 10, 2025

Section 1915 accords judges “the unusual power to pierce the veil of the complaint’s factual allegations and dismiss those claims whose factual contentions are clearly baseless . . . .” Id. at 327. … Paciulete refers to her gender in discussing her ADA claim, but gender does not qualify as a disability.

ORAN

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 11, 2026

A plaintiff commencing an action in federal court bears the burden of establishing federal jurisdiction. See Lincoln Benefit Life Co. v. … These claims are barred by judicial immunity.

Shesko v. City of Coatesville

324 F. Supp. 2d 643 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 29, 2004

Under this framework, a plaintiff must establish a prima facie case of discrimination by showing (i) that she belongs to a protected category; (ii) that she applied for and was qualified for the position at issue; (iii) that … Clearly McMahon and Janssen played a vital role in the decision to recommend Canale rather than Shesko for the lieutenant’s position.

Shiffler v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States

609 F. Supp. 832 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 28, 1985

A federal right or immunity must be an essential element of the plaintiffs cause of action for the suit properly to be maintained in federal court. See Gully v. … However, Justice Brennan’s opinion in Franchise Tax Board clearly establishes that the “artful pleading” doctrine is not merely applicable to labor law disputes.

Miller Ex Rel. Miller v. Penn Manor School District

588 F. Supp. 2d 606 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 30, 2008

There is nowhere that is truly safe or immune from the problem of school violence, from the one-room schoolhouse to America’s largest universities. … Specifically, under the standard established by the Supreme Court in Elrod , plaintiffs have established irreparable injury.

United States v. Cantor

345 F. Supp. 1352 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 20, 1972

Cantor, along with seventeen others, was charged in Bill of Indictment 70-454 with conspiracy and using interstate telephone facilities to conduct an illegal bookmaking establishment. … His assertions clearly lack any substance. The jury simply adopted the overwhelming evidence of guilt and convicted Jerome Cantor. There is no reason to grant a new trial.

Williams v. Wells Fargo Financial Acceptance

564 F. Supp. 2d 441 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 3, 2008

Prima Facie Case To make out a prima facie case of intentional discrimination, Williams must show that: (1) he is a member of a protected class; (2) he was qualified for the job; (3) he suffered an adverse employment action … Conway’s self-serving statement that she did not access the information is not enough to establish that she did not actually do it.

Marks v. Mobil Oil Corp.

562 F. Supp. 759 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 25, 1983

Wamhold’s testimony by contending that Wambold was not qualified to testify as to possible driver reactions to the bow wave created by the Mobil tanker. However, when Dr. … Wambold's testimony, this Court was clearly exercising its discretion in an appropriate manner. Dr. Wambold’s resume clearly indicates that he possesses substantial expertise in the area of vehicle dynamics.

Richburg v. Palisades Collection LLC

247 F.R.D. 457 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 28, 2008

To establish the bona fide error defense a defendant has to establish (1) the violation of the FDCPA was unintentional, (2) the FDCPA violation was due to an underlying bona fide error, and (3) the bona fide error occurred … First, the error was clearly bona fide since the DOE, and not the defendant, computed the time for repayment improperly. Id. at 538 .

Gurley v. Wohlgemuth

421 F. Supp. 1337 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 1, 1976

The state has established the above payment scale because it believes that economies of sale are achieved as unit size increases. … The state is thus said to be establishing the level of need, not reducing payments.

United States v. Graves

465 F. Supp. 2d 450 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 20, 2006

In Bonds , the *458 Sixth Circuit noted that the DNA evidence was “clearly probative because [it] linked [the defendant] to the murder scene when no direct evidence existed to do so.” Id. at 567 . … Fulero, who holds a Ph.D. in psychology and has written numerous papers on forensic psychology, is qualified with respect to the proffered expert testimony.

KOENKE v. SAINT JOSEPH'S UNIVERSITY

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 8, 2021

is akin to a government official’s defense of qualified immunity, which is often raised in a Rule 12(b)(6) motion.” Petruska v. Gannon Univ., 462 F.3d 294, 302-03 (3d Cir. 2006). … If the Supreme Court intended to establish such exceptions, it would have done so.