Case law

Underwood v. Maloney

152 F. Supp. 648 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 23, 1957

The evidence has clearly established that more than the statutory sum of $3,000 exclusive of interest and costs is involved, so if there is a justiciable controversy between these two parties the matter is properly in this … It held that testimony before a union board pertinent and relevant to the issue and not maliciously made constituted a qualified privilege for which there could be no prosecution.

ACEVEDO v. DISTRICT ATTORNEY OFFICE

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 29, 2024

Acevedo alleges that no hearing was held to establish a prima facie case. (Id.) … “[W]hether a prosecutor is entitled to absolute immunity depends on whether she establishes that she was functioning as the state’s ‘advocate’ while engaging in the alleged conduct that gives rise to the constitutional

In Re Providian Financial Corp. Securities Litigation

152 F. Supp. 2d 814 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 5, 2001

Id. (5) Providian promised prospective customers cash rewards of up to $200 for transferring balances, but failed to disclose adequately that a certain minimum balance must be transferred in order to qualify for the reward … Furthermore, having adequately established Mehta and Petrini’s knowledge or recklessness, the SAC also adequately establishes recklessness on the part of Providian as an entity. IV.

SMITH v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 26, 2024

Declaratory Judgment Determining the Duties, Obligations, Rights and Immunities between Plaintiff and the Defendants, and to Superiority of Title Count 3. … Plaintiff is clearly not making a claim related to the conditions of his confinement because Count 6.

RUIZ-RIVERA v. CITY AND COUNTY OF LANCASTER

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 9, 2021

App’x 681, 687 (3d Cir. 2011) (“No Pennsylvania statute establishes, and no Pennsylvania court has recognized, a private cause of action for damages under the Pennsylvania Constitution.”). … Ruiz clearly suffered a physical impact when he was tased and assaulted by multiple officers in his front yard. Mr.

American Bearing Co. v. Litton Industries, Inc.

540 F. Supp. 1163 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 26, 1982

Professor Bowman is well qualified as an economist, however he admitted that he had no expertise concerning the use of bearings in bag-houses and precipitators. *1173 C. … As defendants point out, they were well integrated, established firms in the area.

Crawford v. Verizon Pennsylvania, Inc.

103 F. Supp. 3d 597 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 13, 2015

accounts] that do not qualify for them,” id., and she maintained Nicholson turned a blind eye to these actions. Id. … As a first step, Crawford must establish a pri-ma facie case of discrimination.

Ockford v. ENCOMPASS INSURANCE COMPANY

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 7, 2024

, advisory committee’s note, 1970 Amendment (“Materials assembled in the ordinary course of business, or pursuant to public requirements unrelated to litigation, or for other nonlitigation purposes are not under the qualified … immunity provided by this subdividsion.”)).

Danzy v. Johnson

417 F. Supp. 426 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 4, 1976

A stipulation to this effect was entered into on February 14,1975, and time frames were established for briefing. Hence, the record, as it now exists, is ripe for adjudication. II. … Pugh, 420 U.S. 103 , 95 S.Ct. 854 , 43 L.Ed.2d 54 (1975), demonstrates clearly the effect which the class action status of a law suit may have on considerations of mootness.

JONES v. GANSKY

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 10, 2024

testimony as a witness and to qualified immunity for his participation in Jones’s prosecution. 5 “[A]ctions brought directly under the Constitution against … for his testimony as a witness and entitled to qualified immunity for his participation in Jones’s prosecution.

THROWER

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 8, 2025

. § 1915(e)(2)(B) requires the Court to screen the Complaint and dismiss it if it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or seeks damages from an immune defendant. … A plaintiff commencing an action in federal court bears the burden of establishing federal jurisdiction. See Lincoln Ben. Life Co. v.

Mbagwu v. PPA Taxi & Limousine Division

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

subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States ... to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action … July 27, 2006) (plaintiff has the burden of establishing an illegal policy at the summary judgment phase).

Bass v. Butler

224 F. Supp. 2d 950 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 26, 2002

of WCJ Rosen did not deprive Bass of a fair adjudication by a qualified fact-finder.” … Plaintiff in the instant casé clearly had standing when her federal action was filed.

SOLANO-SANCHEZ v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTO INSURANCE COMPANY

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 27, 2021

Additionally, “[w]ork product prepared in the ordinary course of business is not immune from discovery.” Id. … immunity provided by this subdivision.”).

WILLIAMS v. HAMMER

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 26, 2022

It is well established that a police department cannot be sued. … , an assistant district attorney could present false and unreliable information and be immune from punishment.

P.H. Glatfelter Co. v. Lewis

746 F. Supp. 511 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 14, 1990

The foregoing section clearly states that taxes are due and are to be fully paid at the time and place wherein the tax return is properly and timely filed. … Plaintiff, however, avers that Ecusta may have qualified to do business in that State, thus, it filed a Georgia tax return and paid $71,150.

Viola v. Bensalem Township

601 F. Supp. 1086 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 8, 1984

Counts III and IV of plaintiffs complaint are clearly grounded in contract and tort law, therefore, neither have an independent basis for jurisdiction in federal court. … any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities

LU v. YOUNG

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 10, 2023

Furthermore, in a factual challenge, the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that jurisdiction exists. Id. … These claims must be based upon an explicit Congressional waiver of sovereign immunity. See, e.g., United States v.

Stein v. Cortés

223 F. Supp. 3d 423 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 12, 2016

Classic, 313 U.S. 299, 315 , 61 S.Ct. 1031 , 85 L.Ed. 1368 (1941) (light to vote includes right of “qualified voters within a state to cast their ballots and have them counted”). … Shamos clearly and credibly explained that suggestions of foreign hacking influencing the 2016 Election—including President Obama’s December 9 referral of such hacking for investigation by the Central Intelligence Agency—related

Saavedra v. LEHIGH CARBON COMMUNITY COLLEGE

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

studies are impacted by his disabilities which are: “Autism; chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy; a history of B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia with multiple relapses; a history of stem cell transplant; and poor immune … To prevail on either claim, Saavedra must demonstrate that he “(1) has a disability; (2) was otherwise qualified to participate in a school program; and (3) was denied the benefits of the program or was otherwise subject