Case law

Fakete v. Aetna, Inc.

152 F. Supp. 2d 722 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 14, 2001

To establish a prima facie case under the traditional analysis for ADEA discrimination, a plaintiff must allege that he (1) is 40 years of age or older; (2) was discharged; (3) was qualified for the job; and (4) was replaced … To establish a prima facie case with respect to the refusal to transfer, the plaintiff must show the following four elements: (1) that he is over forty years old, (2) that he was qualified for his position, and (3) that he

GRADY

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

Eleventh Amendment Immunity a. Scope & Applicability “Eleventh Amendment immunity is a ‘threshold, nonmerits issue[.]’” … That action was a qualifying “judicial” proceeding. See Merritts, 62 F.4th at 774.

CESPEDES v. UPPER MORELAND POLICE DEPT,ET AL.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 17, 2025

A plaintiff commencing an action in federal court bears the burden of establishing federal jurisdiction. See Lincoln Ben. Life Co. v. … Because his claim involves actions taken by Judge Murt in his judicial capacity in an action over which he clearly could exercise jurisdiction, the § 1983 claim is dismissed with prejudice.

WOODS v. TERRA

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 9, 2024

Thus, Woods clearly administratively exhausted his claim against Defendant Wendlerhouse. … available the defense of sovereign immunity” in ten limited instances.

Pennsylvania v. Local Union No. 542, International Union of Operating Engineers

347 F. Supp. 268 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 4, 1972

After careful consideration of the extensive, and often intense, arguments of counsel, the records and briefs, I conclude that: s (1) plaintiffs have clearly met their burden of proof 9 in establishing *273 that through some … The events of June 9th are clearly insufficient for injunctive relief.

Sharpe v. Riley

271 F. Supp. 2d 631 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 3, 2003

good moral character for purposes of qualifying for discretionary relief from deportation may “restart” after the issuance of an order to show cause or a conviction. … In a context where Congress had not clearly intended retroactive application, the second step of the Supreme Court’s inquiry was whether the statute “produce[d] an impermissible retroactive effect.”

Holland v. Horn

150 F. Supp. 2d 706 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 25, 2001

First, neither Zettlemoyer nor Frey qualify as “clearly established federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” 45 See id.; Ba nks v. … The Supreme Court's decision in Mills , however, does qualify as clearly established federal law at the time Petitioner's state court conviction became final.

United States v. Doe

364 F. Supp. 1385 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 9, 1973

(“Natali”) in order establish writh as much precision as was possible the particulars in respect to the claimed improper electronic surveillance. … NATALI: Because had he initiated any of the calls, we could very clearly say these calls were made to a different phone. “THE COURT: Any calls that went from this line to Mr.

Carpenter v. Koehring Company

391 F. Supp. 206 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 21, 1975

Bethlehem sent two qualified mechanics, with Kenneth Carpenter as an assistant, to repair the Skooper, which was at the bottom of an open-pit mine. … Clearly, the evidence in this case supports the jury’s finding that there was a defect in the design of the Skooper.

PEPE v. LAMAS

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 18, 2022

Congress did not validly abrogate or purport to abrogate the States' sovereign immunity against damages claims under § 1983, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has not waived its Eleventh Amendment immunity in this … Warden Loretto FCI, 839 F.3d 286, 293 (3d Cir. 2016) (“[f]iling a formal prison grievance clearly constitutes protected activity”).

Martinez v. Triad Controls, Inc.

593 F. Supp. 2d 741 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 6, 2009

He previously has been qualified to testify as an expert on power presses. See id. at 181 . … To establish causation, “the plaintiff must establish that it was the total lack or insufficiency of a warning that was both a cause-in-fact and the proximate cause of the injuries.” Pavlik v. Lane Ltd./Tobacco Exps.

Sablosky v. Paramount Film Distributing Corporation

137 F. Supp. 929 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 13, 1955

Samuelson also qualified as an expert and his expert testimony was admitted in evidence in antitrust cases involving *937 motion picture theatres in Denver and Buffalo. Loew’s, Inc., v. … Defendants must not be allowed to create their own immunity by the extent and duration of their conspiracy.”

GIBSON v. JOHNSON AND JOHNSON

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 19, 2023

These allegations do not support an inference that Plaintiff was excluded from participation in, or denied the benefits of, the services, programs, or activities of a public entity,9 nor do they establish that DOC Defendants … Surely, a prisoner’s consenting to a non-compulsory vaccine does not qualify as a service, program, or activity from which one could be excluded from participation. B.

Alexander v. Fidelity Trust Co.

238 F. 938 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 15, 1915

Matthews, it is relied upon by defendants), ruled that an assignment not made in good faith would not qualify the witness. … It was clearly within its rights in refusing to recognize the trust dr to admit the claimed title of the plaintiffs. It was more than right in calling upon the plaintiffs to establish their title.

Guinan v. A.I. Dupont Hospital for Children

597 F. Supp. 2d 485 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 6, 2009

the professional practice of such physician or dentist (or other specially qualified person so designated), and (B) is not generally available to or generally used by other physicians or dentists (or other specially qualified … Plaintiff mistakenly assumes that an absence of evidence to support its proposition establishes the proposition. However, an absence of evidence that the stent was defective does not establish defectiveness.

Lewis v. Alexander

276 F.R.D. 421 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 22, 2011

are sufficiently low to qualify for Medicaid? … Numerosity The proposed class clearly satisfies the numerosity requirement. Combined, the Family Trust and ARC Community Trust hold accounts for over 1,000 members. (Stip. ¶¶ 15, 24.)

Williams v. City of Lancaster, Pa.

639 F. Supp. 377 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 18, 1986

essential elements to a § 1983 action are present: (1) whether the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under color of state law; and (2) whether this conduct deprived a person of rights, privileges, or immunities … In light of these factors, I cannot say that the detention was too long to qualify as an investigatory stop. Neither can I say that Gatchell had no reason to be suspicious of this group.

MANCO v. St. Joseph's University

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 25, 2024

To establish a prima facie case of racial discrimination, “a plaintiff must show (1) he is a member of a protected class, (2) he was qualified for the position he sought to attain or retain, (3) he suffered an adverse employment … Manco was qualified for his position; he had a Ph.D. in Statistics and taught Mathematics as a Visiting Professor since 2007. (Id. at ¶ 35).

City of Rome v. Glanton

958 F. Supp. 1026 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 15, 1997

Last-ditch efforts to obtain discovery do not qualify as adequate diligence in the eyes of this court. See Order of March 21,1997. … Media statements disseminated by attorneys are extrajudicial communications protected by a qualified immunity, even in their reiteration of the contents of privileged judicial documents. Pelagatti v.

Rannels v. S. E. Nichols, Inc.

447 F. Supp. 417 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 22, 1978

Although not clearly stated, jurisdiction is apparently invoked under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 by reason of the diversity of citizenship. … Clearly, plaintiff’s check was dishonored and she refused to make good within ten days, the offense that a bad check had been passed was complete.