Case law

Williamson-Dickie Mfg. Co. v. Davis Mfg. Co.

149 F. Supp. 852 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 11, 1957

Browne and Andrew B. Beveridge, Washington, D. C., of counsel), for plaintiff. Maxwell L. Davis, Zachary T. Wobensmith, 2nd, Philadelphia, Pa., for defendant. KIRKPATRICK, Chief Judge. … For example, "Diana Deane" was held to infringe "Diana" (Bunte Bros. v. Standard Chocolates, Inc., D.C., 45 F.Supp. 478 ), "C. I. Davids" infringed "Davids" (Thaddeus Davids Co. v.

Parker v. Viacom International, Inc.

605 F. Supp. 2d 659 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 11, 2009

Parker, 530 F.Supp.2d at 677 (citing Brooke Group Ltd. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 509 U.S. 209, 224 , 113 S.Ct. 2578 , 125 L.Ed.2d 168 (1993)). … derogatory and hostile comments about him on USENET, instructed internet users to use software to avoid messages and information generated by plaintiff, and invited readers interested in seduction to visit a private message board

United States ex rel. Marino v. Myers

261 F. Supp. 151 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 9, 1966

Brown v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443, 511 , 73 S.Ct. 397, 448 , 97 L.Ed. 469 (1953) (concurring opinion); and see Townsend v. Sain, 372 U.S. 293, 318 , 83 S.Ct. 745 , 9 L.Ed.2d 770 (1963); Pay v. … Lowry v. Myers, supra.

R.V. v. Rivera

220 F. Supp. 3d 588 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 5, 2016

Defendants rely on a number of cases, including Beard v. Teska, 31 F.3d 942 (10th Cir. 1994), and Whitehead ex rel. Whitehead v. School Board for Hillsborough County, 932 F.Supp. 1393 (M.D. … See Battle v.

Owen Healthcare, Inc. v. Franklin Square Hospital

159 B.R. 453 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 30, 1993

Teachers’ Insurance and Annuity Association of America v. Butler, 803 F.2d 61, 65 (2nd Cir.1986). … As noted in Nernberg & Laffey v.

Gramby v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.

84 F.R.D. 655 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 6, 1979

We believe the across-the-board approach negates defendants’ objections to certification of a single-plant Lester class. … In American Pipe & Construction Co. v.

Noerr Motor Freight, Inc. v. Eastern R. R. Presidents Conference

113 F. Supp. 737 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 21, 1953

Brown, Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad Company, Joseph A. … See Hart & Co. v.

Bessemer Investment Co. v. Chester

22 F. Supp. 311 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 14, 1938

Under these circumstances it seems clear that section 7 has no application: Veterans’ Welfare Board et al. v. Jordan, etc., 189 Cal. 124 , 208 Pac. 284 ; 22 A. L. R. 1515; American Co. v. … (Veterans' Welfare Board v. Jordan, 189 Cal. 124 [ 208 Pac. 284 , 22 A. L.

Smolow v. Hafer

353 F. Supp. 2d 561 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 24, 2005

Defendant relies on Brown v. … V.

Kanivets v. Riley

320 F. Supp. 2d 297 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 1, 2004

See INS v. St. … See Chmakov v.

Raymond v. Hoffmann

284 F. Supp. 596 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 25, 1966

See Judge v. Kortenhaus, 79 N.J.Super. 574 , 192 A.2d 320, 329 (1963); Whelan v. O’Rourke, 5 A.D.2d 156 , 170 N.Y.S.2d 284 (Sup.Ct.1958); Nicoletti v. … Copra v. Suro, supra, 236 F.2d at p. 114 . 16 .

Oshiver v. Levin, Fishbein, Sedran & Berman

818 F. Supp. 104 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 5, 1993

See, e.g.: Rand v. Monsanto Co., 926 F.2d 596 (7th Cir.1991); Streeter v. Joint Industry Board of Electrical Industry, 767 F.Supp. 520, 525 (S.D.N.Y.1991). III. … Stafford v. Muscogee County Board of Education, 688 F.2d 1383, 1390 (11th Cir.1982); Cuffy v. Getty Refining and Marketing Co., 648 F.Supp. 802, 808 (D.Del.1986).

Zlotnick v. Tie Communications, Inc.

123 F.R.D. 189 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 2, 1988

Brown v. SEPTA, C.A. Nos. 86-2229, 86-4037, 86-5886, slip op. at 10 (E.D.Pa. April 8, 1987) [ 1987 WL 9273 ]. … Cumberland Farms v. Browning-Ferris Industries, 120 F.R.D. 642, 646 (E.D.Pa.1988).

Wood v. C.G. Studios, Inc.

660 F. Supp. 176 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 24, 1987

See, Grossman v. Bernards Township Board of Education, [1975] 11 E. P.D. (CCH) ¶ 10,686 (D.N.J.1975), aff'd memo., 538 F.2d 319 (3d Cir.) cert. denied, 429 U.S. 897 , 97 S.Ct. 261 , 50 L.Ed.2d 181 (1976); Ulane v. … Harrisburg School Dist. v.

Seldomridge v. Celebrezze

238 F. Supp. 610 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 30, 1964

Indeed, as Judge Brown of the 5th Circuit has also suggested, ‘assistance by counsel is virtually an act of professional public service in *614 view of the severe restrictions as to attorneys’ fees.’ … Boyd v. Folsom, 3 Cir., 1958, 257 F.2d 778 , at page 781, citing Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board, 1951, 340 U.S. 474, 490 , 71 S.Ct. 456 , 95 L.Ed. 456 .” Klimaszewski v.

Eriksson v. Eriksson

193 F. 296 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 6, 1912

The point was decided by Justice Nelson in Troy Iron Factory v. Corning, Fed. Cas. … . *297 See, also, Indianapolis Water Co. v. American Straw Board Co. (C.

Campos v. Curtis Bay Towing Co. of Pennsylvania

61 F. Supp. 1010 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 20, 1945

Kelly, a Delaware River pilot on board the Foz do Douro, the tugs began a towing operation to place the bark at a safe anchorage. … Stevens v. The White City, supra; The Lizzie D. Shaw, supra ; Delaware Dredging Co. v. Graham, D.C.E.D.Pa., 43 F.2d 852 .

Tosta v. Hooks

568 F. Supp. 616 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 2, 1983

Thompson v. Burke, 556 F.2d 231 (3d Cir.1977). … Sinwell v. Shapp, 536 F.2d 15 (3d Cir.1975); Brown v. Schneckloth, 421 F.2d 1402 (9th Cir.1970), cert. denied 400 U.S. 847 , 91 S.Ct. 95 , 27 L.Ed.2d 85 (1970).

St. Claire v. Cuyler

482 F. Supp. 257 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 28, 1979

Birmingham Trust National Bank, 395 F.2d 685 (5th Cir. 1968); Resident Advisory Board v. … (Discussion of, e. g., Sweet v. South Carolina Department of Corrections, 529 F.2d 854 (4th Cir. 1975) (en banc); LaReau v.

Alaka v. Elwood

225 F. Supp. 2d 547 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 8, 2002

In Patel v. … The Board of Immigration Appeals, vacating the Immigration Judge’s order, stated that neither the Board nor the immigration judge has authority to review custody determinations of arriving aliens.