Case law

CUFF v. AMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS, INC.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 19, 2021

To establish a prima facie case of unlawful retaliation, Mr. … “In order to make out a prima facie case under the ADA, a plaintiff must be able to establish that he or she (1) has a ‘disability’ (2) is a ‘qualified individual’ and (3) has suffered an adverse employment action because

ALSTON v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 31, 2020

Alston has not submitted facts that tend to establish that Lt. Dougherty had actual or constructive knowledge of the harassment. He knew about Sgt. Gorman’s epithet because Sgt. Alston told him about it. … Dougherty had qualified immunity. An appropriate Order follows. BY THE COURT: /s/ Joshua D.

Smith v. HireRight Solutions, Inc.

711 F. Supp. 2d 426 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 12, 2010

The United States Supreme Court has clarified that reckless disregard of FCRA requirements also qualifies as willful violation within the meaning of section 1681n(a) 4 . Safeco Ins. Co. of Am. v. … Second, quite unlike Safeco, where the statute at issue was “less-than-pellucid” and there was a “dearth of guidance,” id. at 70, the statutory text at issue here has a plain and clearly ascertainable meaning.

AHNERT v. LEHIGH VALLEY HEALTH NETWORK

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 24, 2025

She alleges that she was the “best qualified candidate.” Id. at ¶ 29. … To establish constructive discharge, a plaintiff must show “both a hostile work environment and that ‘the abusive working environment became so intolerable that ... resignation qualified as a fitting response.’”

PATTERSON v. QUIGLEY

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 6, 2019

immunity. … Because the Court finds Patterson failed to exhaust his administrative remedies within BCJ, the Court does not address qualified immunity. simple dead end.”

Goldstein v. Regal Crest, Inc.

59 F.R.D. 396 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 30, 1973

. § 77e, although the sale did not qualify for the exemption in Section 3(a) (11) of the 1933 Act, 15 U. … Such statements clearly cannot be standardized, particularly when they are made by several different persons.

Philadelphia Newspapers, LLC v. Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors

408 B.R. 585 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 11, 2009

“An abuse of discretion exists where the district court’s decision rests upon a clearly erroneous finding of fact, an errant conclusion of law or an improper application of law to fact.” … In contrast, at the time of the § 330 analysis, counsel’s representation has concluded, the facts are established, and the result obtained.

WOOD v. NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 21, 2020

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has not established a clear test for “position of peril.” In Moss v. … The question of contributory fault in this case is clearly a question for the factfinder. E.

PARRISH v. COUNTY OF DELAWARE

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 3, 2024

Parrish is a qualified individual under the ADA. … To establish a claim for discrimination under the ADA, the plaintiff must first show that they are “qualified to perform the essential functions of the job, with or without reasonable accommodations by the employer.”

Sargent v. School District of Philadelphia

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 8, 2022

For example, to qualify for fall 2022 admission at Palumbo, Carver, Central, or Masterman, students were required to have earned exclusively A’s and B’s, whereas to qualify for fall 2021 admission to any of these schools … Table 4 clearly shows that the six zip codes given preference, 19121, 19132, 19133, 19134, 19135, and 19140 have had the six lowest percentages of 9th grade students enrolled at Carver, Central, Masterman and Palumbo from

GROSSINGER

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 9, 2026

As the Court has already stated, Grossinger has not alleged in his Complaint that he is a qualified person with a disability, rendering the Title II claim implausible. … “Section 1983 provides a civil remedy for the ‘deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.’” Halsey v.

Pearl Musical Instrument Company Co. Ltd. v. Hoshino Gakki Co., Ltd. et al.

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

The visual elements here are clearly stated. Cf Classic Touch Décor, Inc. v. Michael Aram, Inc., No. 15-CV-453 (NGG) (RLM), 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 144636 at *12 (E.D.N.Y. … The Court disagrees, however, with Plaintiff's presumption that copying alone is sufficient, instead viewing it as one of many factors that may establish secondary meaning.

Washington v. Heckler

573 F. Supp. 1567 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 9, 1983

Center so that he could become qualified to work as a tailor. … Subsequent rulings under the EAJA clearly indicate that attorney’s fees may be awarded in favor of litigants challenging the termination of Social Security benefits. Guthrie v. Schweiker, supra.

SWINTON v. WALK

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 3, 2024

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). III. … “The Supreme Court has recognized that a constitutional right to effectively use the courts has been found in the Article IV Privileges and Immunities Clause, the First Amendment Petition Clause, the Fifth Amendment Due

Gunser v. City of Philadelphia

398 F. Supp. 2d 392 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 15, 2005

Any statements regarding Plaintiffs’ willingness to repeat such supportive statements at Dougherty’s trial are clearly related to the statements to the investigators. 15 Furthermore, the retaliation alleged in this case is … It is well-settled that while an action for malicious prosecution can be maintained under § 1983, to state a viable claim, a plaintiff must establish that he was prosecuted. Keim v.

NAGAIAH v. SENG

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

First, if a foreign national qualifies for this visa, he or she does not need to have an offer of employment in the United States. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(5). … USCIS next explained that there was not enough evidence that his one patent established that he has risen to the very top of the field. (Id.)

Crumpton v. Potter

305 F. Supp. 2d 465 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 25, 2004

Under a disparate treatment analysis, to establish a prima facie case of race discrimination, a plaintiff must show that (1) he is a member of a protected class; (2) he was qualified for the position; (3) he was discharged … The Third' Circuit has cautioned, however, that “[ajlthough timing and ongoing antagonism have often been the basis for the causal link, our case law clearly has allowed a plaintiff to substantiate a causal connection for

Michini v. Rizzo

379 F. Supp. 837 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 9, 1974

Have the Defendants Established That Directive IS Is Justified by Considerations of Safety ? Stull v. School Board of Western Beaver Jr.-Sr. … It must be equally safe to qualify.

Grant Heilman Photography, Inc. v. McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

28 F. Supp. 3d 399 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 26, 2014

In 2003, the parties entered into a Preferred Vendor Agreement (PVA), which established pricing for each kind of licensing. Pi’s Ex. H. … But the only evidence of *409 this industry standard was the testimony of defendants’ corporate designee, which the court rejected because he was not qualified to testify as an expert.

United States v. Harris

368 F. Supp. 697 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 26, 1973

The fact of the matter is that the witness furnished an answer that can be said to be clearly responsive to the question and a claim of “surprise” by defense counsel is clearly unjustified. … the Court gave to the jury on the special care that should be given to the testimony of the informant Linda Johnson was as follows: “The testimony of an informer who provides evidence against a defendant for pay or for immunity