Case law

In Re Craftmatic Securities Litigation

703 F. Supp. 1175 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 27, 1989

projections both in filings with the SEC and in general____ Because of the SEC’s change in policy, courts have begun to re-examine the position that a company’s decision not to disclose predictive information is always immune … distributors’; (s) Failed to disclose that there was no reasonable basis for defendant Kraftsow’s statement in Craftmatic’s 1986 Annual Report that, ‘We are very confident that before the close of Fiscal 1987 we shall demonstrate clearly

International Election Systems Corp. v. Shoup

452 F. Supp. 684 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 24, 1978

The terms of the 1967 proposed new contract and the circumstances surrounding *692 its drafting clearly recognized the continued existence of the 1955 contract as of that time. 13. … Information which is common knowledge, a matter of public record, or easily ascertainable does not qualify as a trade secret. Midland-Ross Corp. v.

Cumberland Truck Equipment Co. v. Detroit Diesel Corp.

401 F. Supp. 2d 415 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 14, 2005

sonable to presume that Congress would intentionally craft a two-pronged provision with a superfluous first clause, ostensibly link the two provisions with the ‘in such cases’ language, but nonetheless fail to indicate clearly … None of the moving Defendants are incorporated in Pennsylvania, thus they do not qualify as “inhabitants” of this District. (Cumberland Amend. Compl. ¶¶ 12, 16, 19, 20, 22, 26, 27.)

Gentry v. Sikorsky Aircraft Corp.

383 F. Supp. 3d 442 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 22, 2019

Friend for establishing the citizenship of the parties for purposes of diversity jurisdiction. … Pa. 2018) ("[D]ocuments qualifying as public records may be judicially noticed by courts."). In her supplemental brief on jurisdictional discovery, Ms. Gentry argues that (1) Mr.

Windsor Communications Group, Inc. v. Havertown Printing Co. (In Re Windsor Communications Group, Inc.)

79 B.R. 210 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 25, 1987

Secondly, and this is the reason for this letter, in a unilateral action for which Norcross-Rust Craft had given no written approval by a qualified officer, Havertown was placing itself in the advantageous position in relation … There are two (2) closely connected theories which serve as the basis of the aforementioned established rule that a creditor has no valid right to setoff when conversion has occurred.

Bucks County Cable TV, Inc. v. United States

299 F. Supp. 1325 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 28, 1969

FACTS Plaintiff was organized to establish and operate a community antenna television system in various Bucks County communities. … Clearly, there may be good reasons for denying hearings to persons who object to new service and seek a waiver of the rules.

BRUNSON

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 2, 2026

Furthermore, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is immune from suit for money damages under the Eleventh Amendment and has not waived that immunity for lawsuits filed in federal court. … Any amended complaint must clearly describe the factual basis for his claims and how each defendant was personally involved in the alleged violation of his rights.8 8 It bears noting that this

Live Face on Web, LLC v. Control Group Media Co.

150 F. Supp. 3d 489 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 10, 2015

Copyright Infringement in General “The Copyright Act grants the copyright holder ‘exclusive’ rights to use and to authorize the use of his work in five qualified ways, including reproduction of the copyrighted work in copies … Indeed, it is clearly plausible that a website owner such as TCG would have the right and ability to supervise the operation of its own website. See, Live Face on Web, LLC v.

In Re Cigna Corp. Securities Litigation

459 F. Supp. 2d 338 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 18, 2006

Defendants conclude, therefore, that SERS cannot demonstrate an economic loss that qualifies it to assert a securities claim. … Applying a transaction-based methodology, as most clearly enunciated in the declaration of Dr.

United States v. Ware

840 F. Supp. 2d 850 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 9, 2012

Because “the Marks framework applies where one opinion is clearly narrower’ than another, that is, where one opinion would always lead to the same result that a broader opinion would reach,” Jackson v. … When a defendant qualifies as a Career Offender, USSG § 4A 1.3(b) authorizes a maximum departure of one criminal history category. USSG § 4A1.3(b)(3)(A). .

PURNELL v. GOODLEAP, LLC

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 31, 2023

Purnell’s information and submitted it to see if they qualified to have the system installed. While Mr. Purnell did not qualify, Mrs. Purnell did. At that time, Mrs. … In fact, Taylor was clearly a key player in the factual basis of this lawsuit.

Barel v. Bank of America

255 F.R.D. 393 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 16, 2009

Clearly, a class of 27,350 individuals is so numerous as to make joinder of all class members impracticable. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(a)(1). Therefore, the numerosity requirement is met. 2. … Mailman, of Francis & Mailman, PC, to be competent, experienced and well-qualified to prosecute class actions such as this one. See Orloff, 2004 WL 870691 , at *1-2, 2004 U.S. Dist.

Hanson v. Lehigh County District Attorney Office

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 1, 2021

Ford, in the PCRA proceedings, the testimony at trial was clearly sufficient to convict Hanson of these crimes as the direct perpetrator, or, in accordance with the Commonwealth’s alternative theory, as an accomplice. … It appears Hanson believes that testing on the evidence will establish that Seip, rather than Hanson, was the perpetrator.

HOYLE v. CROZIER

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 16, 2024

the beneficiaries to purchase eligible food from qualifying retailers.” … Ctr., 621 F.3d 249, 254–55 (3d Cir. 2010) (“As the District Court duly noted, Pennsylvania and federal law establish that the DPW is entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity because it is an administrative agency without

KARDOSH v. CHESTER COUNTY AND THE MUNICIPALITY OF WEST GOSHEN

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 5, 2024

The claims against Defendants Mincarelli, Rovito, and Ryan were dismissed with prejudice based on judicial immunity. See ECF No. 6 at 7-8. … The Chester County Court of Common Pleas, as part of Pennsylvania’s unified judicial system, shares in the Commonwealth’s Eleventh Amendment immunity. See Benn v.

THOMAS v. WETZEL

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 4, 2025

Additionally, Thomas’ sentence was not clearly unreasonable, irrational, or unsound. Id. at 28. … According to the R&R, Thomas “failed to allege any facts that, if established at a hearing, would justify relief on his IAC claim.” ECF No. 32 at 5.

WHITAKER v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 6, 2021

Whitaker has no admissible evidence to establish what Mr. Stewart said on the stand. Second, Mr. … And, given the uncertainty of the law in this area, it seems likely that qualified immunity would protect Detectives McDermott and Vivarina even if there were a cognizable claim. 3.

Jetro Cash & Carry Enterprises, Inc. v. Food Distribution Center

569 F. Supp. 1404 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 15, 1983

The hours during which the Produce Market is open for business are established by rules and regulations of Terminal Corporation. … The Supreme Court has held that the actions of municipalities which restrict competition are not immune from the antitrust laws. City of Lafayette, Louisiana, et al. v.

United States Gypsum Co. v. Schiavo Bros.

485 F. Supp. 46 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 22, 1979

are “in general, an extremely difficult group with whom to deal . . . and that upon termination of a junkyard lease, the dealer[s] rarely, if ever, cleared the property of accumulated debris,” should not, without more, immunize … Neither claim was clearly articulated in the complaint.

Northeast Women's Center, Inc. v. McMonagle

624 F. Supp. 736 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 25, 1985

The alleged injury which flows from these actions reflects the anticompetitive effect of the alleged violation, which under Clayton Act analysis, may qualify it as an “antitrust injury” — “the type the antitrust laws were … However, neither does the alleged combination fall very clearly into a category of political activity or of simple tortious action.