Case law

Pocono Invitational Sports Camp, Inc. v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass'n

317 F. Supp. 2d 569 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 30, 2004

Thus, for the same reasons the Third Circuit found eligibility rules immune from antitrust scrutiny, I find that these recruiting rules are also immune. 16 Plaintiffs’ argument that the rules are commercial because they impose … “Where the plaintiff fails to define its proposed relevant market with reference to the rule of reasonable interchangeability and cross-elasticity of demand, or alleges a proposed relevant market that clearly does not encompass

Zarichny v. Complete Payment Recovery Services, Inc.

80 F. Supp. 3d 610 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 21, 2015

A fail-safe class is “one that is defined so that whether a person qualifies as a member depends on whether the person has a valid claim.” Messner v. Northshore University HealthSystem, 669 F.3d 802, 825 (7th Cir.2012). … But before we may consider class-action requirements, our Court of Appeals obliges us to establish two preliminary criteria.

KOVALEV v. LIDL US, LLC

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 31, 2024

Because the Court already addressed Plaintiff’s failure to produce expert testimony to establish a genuine dispute of material fact as to causation for relationship, unequivocal medical testimony is necessary to establish … Oct. 20, 2021) (concluding medical testimony was necessary to establish causation in light of the plaintiff’s “significant prior history wherein he describes similar symptoms” because “factfinders need a qualified medical

NADIE

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 12, 2026

As a defendant, the United States is “entitled to assert any defense based upon judicial or legislative immunity which otherwise would have been available to the employee of the United States whose act or omission gave … In light of this provision, “the state court clearly lacked jurisdiction to enter the default judgment.” Marks v. Blount-Lee, No. 16cv3524, 2017 WL 3098094 at *3 (E.D.N.Y. July 20, 2017).

Pennsylvania v. Tap Pharmaceutical Products, Inc.

415 F. Supp. 2d 516 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 9, 2005

Additionally, neither Medicare nor the Department of Health and Human Services established a process whereby AWPs could be accurately ascertained for federal Medicare purposes. … of judicial resources and consistency of decision at the federal level outweigh any potential prejudice to the Commonwealth because Judge Saris, given her experience dealing with AWP *521 litigation thus far, is uniquely qualified

RIVLIN v. ZIMMER BIOMET

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 23, 2021

Pa. 2010) (“The burden is on the proponent of the evidence — here the plaintiff — to establish admissibility by a preponderance of the evidence.”). … Sept. 29, 2006) (“[P]laintiff filed a response but did not address the sovereign immunity argument made by the Untied States.

STEIN v. COMMUNITY COLLEGE OF PHILADELPHIA

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 21, 2021

Age discrimination cases may be established by direct or indirect evidence. … To establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination, a plaintiff must demonstrate that “(1) he is a disabled person within the meaning of the ADA; (2) he is otherwise qualified to perform the essential functions

QUINN v. COMMUNITY COLLEGE OF PHILADELPHIA

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 21, 2021

Age discrimination cases may be established by direct or indirect evidence. … To establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination, a plaintiff must demonstrate that “(1) he is a disabled person within the meaning of the ADA; (2) he is otherwise qualified to perform the essential functions

MORENCY v. CITY OF ALLENTOWN

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 17, 2020

The Court also determined that based on the factual record there could be no dispute that Blood and Flores were entitled to qualified immunity on Counts One through Five of the SAC— in particular, based on the guidance provided … immunity.

Gaston v. Exelon Corp.

247 F.R.D. 75 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 30, 2007

At the very least, eligibility includes being qualified for a job in one of the described grades. … Plaintiffs have twice sought eleventh-hour extensions of deadlines we had established, which we have denied.

The Williamsport

167 F. 184 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 3, 1909

s that he passed about 550 feet east of the Gas buoy, but the distance was clearly much less — he must have known that if the Piedmont’s signal was accepted the Williamsport would be forced to the extreme western edge, unless … A. 329 : “The duty of the master to stand by and to do the other things named in the statute is a qualified obligation.

WHITMORE v. OBERLANDER

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 7, 2022

The Court: Do you understand that if it can be established you lied at this proceeding, that that is all gone, that immunity petition is gone? … Thus, the state court’s decision was neither contrary to nor an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law. 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Mr.

BRAND DESIGN COMPANY, INC. v. RITE AID CORPORATION

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 14, 2024

Here, payments made by Rite Aid to the other Defendants in connection with its rebranding effort are clearly relevant to House’s claims. … It is well established in this circuit that the disclosure of sensitive financial information is the sort of “clearly defined and serious injury” warranting a departure from the presumption of access to judicial records

ISAAC'S DELI, INC. v. STATE AUTO PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 14, 2021

Preemptive safety measures intended to curb the spread of the COVID-19 virus, however, do not establish the existence of structural damage or loss to nearby properties. … In these cases, plaintiffs who had not clearly articulated the reasons supporting their expectation were granted leave to offer more specific allegations. Id. This is not there case here.

Perry v. Novartis Pharma. Corp.

456 F. Supp. 2d 678 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 16, 2006

Rather, the government must initiate an enforcement action to establish that the drug is in fact misbranded.”) … The FDA approved tacrolimus on September 8, 1999 for use in treating atopic dermatitis. 5 .Both pimecrolimus and tacrolimus belong to a class of drugs known as calcineurin inhibitors, so called because they reduce immune

Baez v. Federal Bureau of Investigation

443 F. Supp. 2d 717 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 28, 2006

section does not apply to matters that are— (2) related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of an agency; (6) personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would *721 constitute a clearly … Section 706(2)(B) provides that a reviewing court shall set aside agency action that is “contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity.”

MONTGOMERY COUNTY INTERMEDIATE UNIT NO. 23 v. K.S.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 29, 2021

Absent a state practice clearly foreclosing public funding of typical preschools for disabled children when necessary for FAPE, we cannot conclude that Pennsylvania has clearly opted out of the IDEA’s FAPE requirements … Only where, as here, it is clearly established that the disabled child requires placement in a typical preschool to receive FAPE is the LEA responsible for tuition.

N.M. ex rel. W.M. v. Central Bucks School District

992 F. Supp. 2d 452 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 16, 2014

However, Plaintiffs present no extrinsic evidence establishing that the teachers were incapable of testifying regarding his emotional needs. (See id.) … Again, this report does not clearly present a picture of a student who clearly had behavioral issues. Regardless, in that IEP the District provided a program to address N.M.’s emotional needs. (P-21 at 17.)

Ford-Greene v. NHS, Inc.

106 F. Supp. 3d 590 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 20, 2015

Under the *604 McDonnell Douglas model, the plaintiff is first required to set forth sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case. … "Under that familiar test, the plaintiff must first establish a prima facie case of discrimination by showing that: (1) s/he is a member of a protected class; (2) s/he was qualified for the position s/he sought to attain

Gaynor v. Ephrata Community Hospital

690 F. Supp. 373 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 23, 1988

The nonforfeitability provisions of 29 U.S.C. § 1053 , however, clearly preclude such an implied waiver of past participation rights in a pension plan. … Clark, 473 F.Supp. 902, 908 (M.D.Fla.1979) (intent of Congress to protect employees from bargaining away benefits provided by plans qualified under ERISA).