Case law

Bates v. Western Electric

420 F. Supp. 521 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 28, 1976

Therefore, the additional pleading *526 sets forth only those facts which clearly arise out of the transaction or occurrence set forth in the original pleading. … The allegations in the amended complaint establish that Mr.

Siegel v. Homestore, Inc.

255 F. Supp. 2d 451 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 19, 2003

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals has made clear that acts or omissions must be more than tangentially connected to qualify as “substantial” under § 1391(a)(2). Dollar Discount Stores of America, Inc. v. Petrusha, Civ. … In thus weighing all of the foregoing “private interest” factors, we conclude that the scale clearly weighs more heavily in favor of California than Pennsylvania.

City of Philadelphia v. American Coastal Industries, Inc.

704 F. Supp. 587 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 14, 1988

Simultaneously with the execution and delivery of this Contract, the Contractor shall furnish properly executed performance bonds written by a qualified surety or sureties in form acceptable to Purchaser in the amount of … The fact that the City required that such bonds be supplied was clearly delineated and understood by ACI at each and every stage of the bidding process. 6 As a result, this court need not decide whether a letter of credit

THORPE v. TOWNSHIP OF SALISBURY, PENNSYLVANIA

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 25, 2023

C.S.A. § 2310 (The “Commonwealth, and its officials and employees acting within the scope of their duties, shall continue to enjoy sovereign immunity and official immunity and remain immune from suit except as the General … Assembly shall specifically waive the immunity.”); 2 Pa.

KITTRELL

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 3, 2026

Defendants also argue that Plaintiff’s federal claims are barred by qualified immunity. Id. at 11–12. … Based on the Court’s conclusions regarding exhaustion and the merits of Plaintiff’s federal law claims, the Court will not comment on Defendants’ arguments as to the applicability of qualified immunity. 3 Earlier in

LEWIS v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PARKING VIOLATIONS

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 9, 2023

1994) (explaining that a “party seeking to seal any part of a judicial record bears the heavy burden of showing that ‘the material is the kind of information that courts will protect’ and that ‘disclosure will work a clearly … A plaintiff commencing an action in federal court bears the burden of establishing federal jurisdiction. See Lincoln Ben. Life Co. v.

United States v. Tesfa

404 F. Supp. 1259 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 30, 1975

Levitt was eminently qualified. Moreover, in United States v. Green, supra, 373 F.Supp. at 157-58 , I concluded that Mr. … Clearly the testimony of psychologists, as well as psychiatrists, is admissible on the question of insanity. United States v. Brawner, 153 U.S.App. D.C. 1, 471 F.2d 969, 994 (en banc, 1972); Jenkins v.

YOAST v. POTTSTOWN BOROUGH

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 3, 2020

Hussain’s consent to enter the home did not provide consent for the police to enter the basement,65 based on Stanton, the officers are entitled to qualified immunity. 6. … The Court notes that none of the individual defendants raised the defense of qualified immunity. 185 Doc.

Maffei v. PERKIOMEN VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 27, 2025

Ann. §§ 8541-64, which grants her immunity from such claims. … Because these are negligence claims that are not included in the limited list of negligence claims for which immunity is waived, we dismiss the claims in Counts V and VI of the Complaint based on Lutz-Bennett’s immunity

AFRASIABIPOUR v. PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 26, 2020

“PennDOT is clearly a state agency and thus eligible for Eleventh Amendment protection.” Fitzpatrick v. Pa. Dep’t of Transp., 40 F. Supp. 2d 631, 634 (E.D. … Prima Facie Case of National Origin and Racial Discrimination “To establish a prima facie case of discrimination under Title VII, a plaintiff must show that he: (1) was a member of a protected class; (2) was qualified

Chester Branch, National Ass'n for Advancement of Colored People v. City of Chester

253 F. Supp. 707 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 26, 1966

. § 1343 , claiming deprivation of certain rights, privileges and immunities secured by the Constitution of the United States by a certain ordinance of the City of Chester. … The instant case clearly concerns a charge of interference with an essential freedom, the freedom of speech.

El v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority

418 F. Supp. 2d 659 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 12, 2005

2000e(f), The term “employee” means an individual employed by an employer, except that the term “employee” shall not include any person elected to public office in any State or political subdivision of- any State by the qualified … David Griffin, Ph.D., who is equally as qualified as is Dr. Fairley to render an opinion on the issue of whether the SEPTA policy had a (statistical) disparate impact on minority employees. Specifically, Dr.

Harris v. Pernsley

654 F. Supp. 1042 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 19, 1987

Although the Commonwealth defendants were entitled to qualified official immunity on claims for money damages, they had *1045 filed no summary judgment motions. … The Risk of Establishing Damage or Harm If the plaintiff-prisoner class established that the conditions of confinement in the Philadelphia prisons were unconstitutional, the court would order relief.

Raymond Proffitt Foundation v. United States Environmental Protection Agency

930 F. Supp. 1088 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 16, 1996

The EPA is charged with establishing and enforcing the states’ “technology-based limitations on individual discharges into the country’s navigable waters from point sources.” … On a motion for summary judgment, the non-moving party has the burden to produce evidence to establish prima facie each element of its claim or defense. Celotex Corp. v.

FEHNEL

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 30, 2026

established constitutional rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments.” … immunity.

GOK v. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 22, 2023

Gok lacked standing to assert criminal violations; (2) many of the defendants were immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment, or were shielded by absolute, qualified, or judicial immunity; and (3) to the extent that … Gok has not established that she is entitled to relief under Ruie 60(b)(3), thus the Court will deny Ms. Gok’s motion for reconsideration. II.

Slaughter v. Philadelphia National Bank

290 F. Supp. 234 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 18, 1968

The verdict was perverse and clearly demanded the exercise of the court’s authority to prevent a miscarriage of justice. … “By the great weight of authority the owner of personal property is qualified by his ownership alone to testify as to its value. * * * The weight of such testimony is, of course, affected by the owner’s knowledge of circumstances

JONES v. United States

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

Since Congress has not waived sovereign immunity for the asserted claims against the United States, Jones’s claims against the United States are barred by sovereign immunity. … This alone is sufficient to establish that Jones’s due process claims represent a “new context” under Bivens, requiring a special factors analysis.

HURDLE v. DANTOS

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 17, 2020

This clearly falls within the ambit of acts “intimately associated with the judicial phase of the criminal process.” … To establish a basis for a Fourteenth Amendment violation, a prisoner must allege that his conditions of confinement amount to punishment. Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 538 (1979).

LU v. KERRY

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 21, 2025

“[I]n construing the federal RICO law, [the Third] Circuit has rejected the argument that personal injuries qualify as RICO injuries to ‘business or property.’” Williams v. … However, claims against federal agencies and officials under state law are barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity. See Clark v. Wells Fargo Bank, 585 F.