Case law

NEWSON

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 19, 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. AEI Life, LLC, 800 F.3d 99, 105 (3d Cir. 2015). “Jurisdictional [issues] . . .

MORLEY v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

Burrough’s qualified immunity. IV. … Plaintiff erroneously relies on Bivens to assert an implied right of action against federal agents, as his claims are clearly distinguishable from Bivens, Davis, and Carlson and would require an expansion of the remedy

Schnell v. Bank of New York Mellon

828 F. Supp. 2d 798 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 22, 2011

This application clearly lists her monthly household income as $4,842.93. Mot. Dismiss Ex. F. … Bank of America, therefore, does not qualify as a credit repair organization, and Schnell provides no facts or case law to indicate otherwise.

EASTMOND v. GALKIN

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 2, 2024

Eastmond does not establish a prima facie case of FMLA retaliation and thus her claim fails as a matter of law. It is undisputed that she invoked her right to FMLA-qualifying leave. … Moreover, the deposition testimony Plaintiff cites to as direct evidence, contrary to Plaintiff’s assertions, clearly states that Dr.

Walkup v. Santander Bank, N.A.

147 F. Supp. 3d 349 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 3, 2015

(“Santander”) and PHH Mortgage Corporation (“PHH”) knew that Plaintiffs would not qualify for a loan modification, but nonetheless engaged in deceptive conduct to encourage default on the loan so that Plaintiffs could submit … Defendants’ arguments that Plaintiffs’ state law claims must fail because they are “thinly-veiled attempts to assert a private cause of action under HAMP” and are “clearly derivative of a HAMP claim, Defs.

Leone v. Cataldo

574 F. Supp. 2d 471 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 11, 2008

As the Third Circuit concluded, “[hjaving traveled to Pennsylvania to return decedent’s body, [defendants] clearly availed themselves of the ‘privilege of acting within’ Pennsylvania” and “with respect to this claim the [ … “[To] qualify as a prohibited act under the statute, the deception of a consumer must occur in New York.” Goshen v. Mutual Life Ins.

DERRICK v. GLEN MILLS SCHOOLS

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 13, 2024

Plaintiffs’ class of 1,661 members clearly satisfies numerosity. … However, the DHS Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. The court will consider this argument separately on their motion for summary judgment. See Rouse v.

SIMS v. HARRY

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 17, 2024

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 … Plaintiffs’ negligence claims clearly fall within the doctrine’s prohibitions. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ negligence claims are also dismissed with prejudice. B.

WILSON v. CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 20, 2023

Wilson’s own deposition testimony establishes that he was not qualified for his position within the meaning of the ADA because he could not perform the essential functions of the job. See Garner v. … Wilson’s Title VII race discrimination claim cannot survive summary judgment for the very same reason that his ADA claim fails: he has not established that he was qualified for the job as of June 2020.

In Re Penn Central Securities Litigation

416 F. Supp. 907 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 21, 1976

Secondly, the efforts of the Trustees clearly went beyond those required by the discovery rules. … This is clearly not the case, however. 26 . Even if such a request had been made, we ■ have serious doubts whether petitioners would be entitled to any such fees.

Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Swisher

731 F. Supp. 691 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 29, 1989

prosecute to judgment any action against any person who may be legally liable therefor. (3) In any instance where it would inure directly and indirectly to the benefit of any workmen’s compensation carrier or to any person qualified … The relevant section, which clearly addressed the issue before the court, states: The coverages required by this subchap-ter shall not be made subject to an exclusion or reduction in amount because of any workers’ compensation

American Chemical Paint Co. v. McCaughn

24 F. Supp. 258 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 21, 1937

following reservation or condition: “American Chemical Paint Company expressly reserves its right, if dissatisfied *260 with the amount of the tax so assessed, to appeal to the Courts and to have the value of its patents established … S., 6 Cir., 70 F.2d 365 , as authority for the rule that if the Commissioner accepts a conditional and qualified application, the taxpayer loses his rights at law. I do not think the case goes quite that far.

ID Security Systems Canada, Inc. v. Checkpoint Systems, Inc.

249 F. Supp. 2d 622 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 28, 2003

Even viewed in a light most favorable to ID, the above testimony clearly does not establish that locked-in customers were charged prices at or above the average price of RF tags, and, thus, that Checkpoint had significant … The other content clearly relates to amounts owed and allegations of breach.

JONES

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 24, 2026

“Section 1983 provides a civil remedy for the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.” Halsey v. … criminal and civil actions,” that he “clearly outlines actions taken against him by prison staff as a result of his ongoing litigation against prison staff for acts of violence against himself and conditions of confinement

Morilus v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.

651 F. Supp. 2d 292 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 22, 2008

Morilus’ “Qualified Written Requests” 15 regarding the mortgage. (Am. Compl. ¶¶ 37-38.) … A “Qualified Written Request” is "a written correspondence ... that ...

Colacicco v. Apotex, Inc.

432 F. Supp. 2d 514 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 25, 2006

Thus, he argues the FDCA establishes a floor and not a ceiling with regards to labeling standards. … First, where Plaintiff's entire complaint is based on failure-to-warn, clearly the warnings themselves are documents upon which the complaint is based.

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION v. GEISINGER HEALTH

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

mental health issues were resolved, his long record with [defendant] without any performance issues due to his mental health, and the medical clearances he obtained in order to enable his return to work, the complaint clearly … reasonable accommodations, which establish that there was not a lack of good faith on Defendants’ part and that Defendants could not have reasonably accommodated Casterline. (Id. at 17–20.)

Ferguson v. Hartford Life & Accident Insurance

268 F. Supp. 2d 463 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 23, 2003

ERISA Standard of Review The denial of benefits under an ERISA qualified plan must be reviewed using a deferential standard. … Stafford emphatically stated: [Ferguson] clearly has a sleep disorder .... [he] deteriorated during the period of my treatment. His sleepiness became more problematic and refractory to stimulant medication.

Cronin v. West Whiteland Township

994 F. Supp. 595 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 19, 1998

The facts, which are either admitted or undisputed, when viewed in the “totality of the circumstances,” clearly support a finding that the police officers on the scene had probable eause to believe plaintiff had assaulted … General Electric Astrospace, 101 F.3d 947, 951 (3d Cir.1996), and "must make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of every essential element to his case, based on the affidavits or by depositions and admissions

DAVIS v. CHESTER CROZER HOSPITAL

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 6, 2022

As the Commonwealth has not waived its Eleventh Amendment immunity for lawsuits filed in federal court, state entities and officials sued in their official capacities are immune from suits filed in federal court. … Any second amended complaint should clearly describe the factual basis for Davis’s claims against the relevant defendant and how the defendant was involved in the alleged denial of his Constitutional rights.