Case law

ROMAN v. LITTLE

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 4, 2019

Roman attempts to raise claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act as a qualified individual with a physical disability while confined at SCI-Chester.! … Under the doctrine of sovereign immunity, we also dismiss Mr. Roman’s state law claims against the Department. The Commonwealth has not waived sovereign immunity for such claims, and dismissal is proper.™ Mr.

Dietz v. Avco Corp.

168 F. Supp. 3d 747 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 10, 2016

It is well settled that such corporations qualify as persons under the statute and may seek removal accordingly. … Clearly, the Continental Defendants were aware that the Interface Defendants had been served before filing the Notice of Removal, because the Interface Defendants were included on the notice’s Certificate of Service dated

Higgins v. Philadelphia Gas Works

54 B.R. 928 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 9, 1985

Because the stipulation of settlement does not clearly and unambiguously refer to a waiver of a right to attorney’s fees, the plaintiffs did not waive their right to seek such fees. II. … “Restoration of service to the [plaintiffs] was not a manifestation of an abandonment or of a retreat from this established policy.

Kauffman v. Cal Spas

37 F. Supp. 2d 402 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 2, 1999

To establish a claim under the ADA, the plaintiff must establish: “(1) that he is a disabled person within the meaning of the ADA; (2) that he is qualified, that is, with or without reasonable accommodation (which he must … Kauffman’s default judgment, however, clearly was more than an administrative act. The default judgment was not merely entered by the clerk, but was ordered by the court.

GREENAWAY

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

In other words, a district court may raise the issues of res judicata and collateral estoppel sua sponte when the issue is clearly presented by the complaint. See, e.g., Pino v. … Thus, judicial immunity bars Palamar’s suit for civil damages.”).

Lesser & Kaplin, P.C. v. American Insurance

723 F. Supp. 1099 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 12, 1989

To qualify, the Authority must have committed some act by which it purposefully availed itself of the privilege of conducting activities in Pennsylvania, thus invoking the benefit and protection of its laws. Hanson v. … The negotiation and execution of the construction contract clearly contemplated performance in Virginia.

Haas v. WARDEN, SCI SOMERSET

760 F. Supp. 2d 484 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 7, 2010

“It is past question that the rule set forth in Stñckland qualifies as ‘clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.’ ” Williams, 529 U.S. at 391 , 120 S.Ct. 1495 . … As 'a result, the PCRA court did not unreasonably apply clearly established federal law to either Haas's ineffective assistance claims or his public trial claims. 1 .

Powers v. Lycoming Engines

272 F.R.D. 414 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 9, 2011

citizens of all states, except California, and the District of Columbia, who own or owned aircraft with a qualifying crankshaft. … for breach of an implied warranty of merchantability 53 Louisiana allows a seller to limit damages suffered as a result of the breach of redhibitory defects, 54 but when a contract contemplates such a limitation, it “must clearly

ZAHLER

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

The termination letter further establishes that Dejavoo terminated Plaintiff from his employment with Dejavoo. See Exhibit AB to Compl. … Plaintiff has likewise failed to allege any other qualifying predicate act.

Pusey v. BECTON DICKINSON AND CO.

794 F. Supp. 2d 551 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 7, 2011

“The results of the real-world testing did not clearly indicate at which altitude the packages could reach without opening.” Pis.’ … ‘the plaintiff must establish that the product was defective’ in order to prevail.” Baylis v. Red Lion Group, Inc., 214 Fed.Appx. 193, 195 (3d Cir.2007).

SHORT v. WEBB

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 20, 2019

Similarly, a dismissal based on a defendant’s absolute or qualified immunity “does not constitute a PLRA strike, including a strike based on frivolousness, unless a court explicitly and correctly concludes that the complaint … “[P]arole is an established variation on imprisonment of convicted criminals . . . .

Jungkurth v. Eastern Financial Services, Inc.

87 B.R. 333 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 15, 1988

In addition, plaintiffs argue that the underlying transaction did not qualify as a business loan under Pennsylvania law and furthermore that the bankruptcy court erred in failing to award damages for unfair collection practices … The present case is clearly distinguishable since there was statutory authorization under state law for the award of reasonable attorney fees by Judge Scholl. See, 41 P.S. § 503. In re Jungkurth, 74 B.R. at 336 . 3 .

United States v. Simmons

444 F. Supp. 500 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 20, 1978

A witness was called to testify before the grand jury, and upon the witness’s refusal to testify, a petition for immunity had been filed and granted. Id. at 678 . … Nevertheless, the remedy against potential abuses is not to establish a rule, easily circumvented, by which some formal act of the grand jury will be required to establish “pendency.” Id. (footnote omitted).

Capps v. Mondelez Global LLC

147 F. Supp. 3d 327 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 24, 2015

Under this framework, Capps must establish a prima facie case of discrimination. See Ross, 755 F.3d at 193 . … Capps also states in his motion that "It is a per se interference violation to consider prior FMLA-qualifying absenteeism in a decision to terminate an employee.” (Mem. Mot. For Partial Summ. J. at 14-15, ECF No. 47.)

C.D.A. v. United States

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 28, 2023

Plaintiffs’ Forum Preference To begin, the plaintiffs’ forum preference clearly weighs in their favor. … Common Question of Law or Fact The second element also favors the plaintiffs here, and more clearly so.

ROMIG, JR. v. COUNTY OF LEHIGH

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 4, 2023

They further allege the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity from the alleged federal claims, and the state law claims are barred by the Pennsylvania Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act. Doc. … There is no Constitutional right to be paid for a particular position that requires certain job functions that a person is not qualified, willing, or able, to perform.

RATLIFF v. DETECTIVE MICHAEL GETTLER

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 14, 2023

“A plaintiff’s failure to establish any element in its favor renders a preliminary injunction inappropriate.” Nutrasweet Co. v. Vit-Mar Enters., 176 F.3d 151, 153 (3d Cir. 1999). … Witnesses are entitled to absolute immunity from civil rights claims based on their testimony in court. See Williams v.

RIVERA v. PAUL LITTLE

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 23, 2024

Stat. § 2310 (establishing immunity for Commonwealth officials and employees); 42 Pa. Cons. … The timing of the allegedly retaliatory behavior relative to the constitutionally protected conduct may establish a causal link between the two for purposes of establishing motivation.

Randle v. United States

954 F. Supp. 2d 339 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 8, 2013

Oct. 17, 2003) (finding that a lockdown and limited library access alone did not qualify for equitable tolling). … This is clearly a breech [sic] of contract.” Pet. Aff. Ex. A.

In re Dunkle

8 F. Cas. 65 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 19, 1871

The language of the agreement indicates no less clearly that if the excess had been the other way, Mr. … That “fraud without damage gives no cause of action, but both must concur,” may be considered an established rule or maxim of both law and equity.