Case law

PELPHREY-WEIGAND

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

Under a pretext theory, Plaintiff must establish: (1) that she has a disability as defined by the ADA; (2) she is a qualified individual and could perform the essential function of the position; and (3) her disability … Super. 2025), reargument denied (July 29, 2025) (a recipient of Medicaid funding qualifies as a public body because the law clearly indicates that it is intended to be applied to bodies that receive public money that passes

CLARK v. BEARD

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 25, 2023

was dated February 22, 2023, and expressed his belief that the Superior Court’s decision was contrary to clearly established federal law. See Doc. No. 75. … A motion that seeks to add a new ground for relief . . . will of course qualify.” Id. at 532.

KRASLEY

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 6, 2026

A single employment decision, such as termination, qualifies as a municipal policy if the decisionmaker possessed final authority with respect to the action. Fletcher v. … 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.”); Rega v. U.P.M.C. Cmty.

North Penn Oil & Tire Co. v. Phillips Petroleum Co.

358 F. Supp. 908 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 14, 1973

It has always paid its bills promptly when presented, qualifying in every instance (except two) for discount terms given by Phillips for prompt payment of bills. … This is clearly what North Penn intended to do until it discovered that it could not find another gasoline supplier because of the present shortage of gasoline.

Hickey v. Commandant of the Fourth Naval District

461 F. Supp. 1085 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 7, 1978

The two blood pressure readings taken during the August 28, 1978, examination were 148/98 and 160/94, and Hickey was not qualified for duty at that time. Id, at 5. … I therefore agree with petitioner that the Navy’s argument on this score is clearly untenable.

Sek v. Bethlehem Steel Corp.

421 F. Supp. 983 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 26, 1976

In June of 1970, the records show he was considered “qualified for increased responsibility”. … He complained that his duties were not clearly defined. He complained that he was unfairly treated in not having been given exempt status.

John Wright, Inc. v. Casper Corp.

419 F. Supp. 292 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 25, 1976

John Wright holds no trademark for its certificate of authenticity, but claims that it qualifies as “trade dress” and that Casper’s use of a deliberately similar merchandising tool amounts to unfair competition. … None of these allegations, even if true, would establish the defense of unclean hands.

ReMed Recovery Care Centers v. Township of Willistown

36 F. Supp. 2d 676 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 10, 1999

Brain-injured persons, such as the residents and would-be residents of the Willistown Home, unquestionably qualify as handicapped persons under the Act. 7. … Clearly, three ReMed clients will be unable to live at 84 Devon Road without the accommodation, including one client who had an established relationship with the other residents of the Willistown Home.

Jones v. Bergland

456 F. Supp. 635 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 30, 1978

Each producer (or if a member of a qualified cooperative, the cooperative) is entitled to receive this uniform price (subject to certain adjustments) for the pounds of milk delivered by him to handlers under the respective … Hand presented at the hearing for preliminary relief held on October 13,1977, for the limited purpose of establishing the factual basis for plaintiffs’ allegation of standing in this action.

Piel v. National Semiconductor Corp.

86 F.R.D. 357 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 21, 1980

This is clearly contrary to the philosophy espoused in this and other circuits. … This is clearly not the substance of the plaintiffs charge, nor is it suggested by the facts. .

COLLINS v. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 11, 2024

dismiss the Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) because the Amended Complaint fails to allege a basis for a waiver of the United States’ sovereign immunity … Clearly, if the RRF program has expired and it has no funds, we cannot grant Plaintiff the relief she seeks, i.e., an award of the $550,430.04 RRF grant she sought for Homestyle Bakery. (See Am. Compl. at 3 of 19.)

HENDERSON v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE

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

MC3 concedes, for the purposes of summary judgment, that Sneed-Jacobs satisfies the first three elements to establish a prima facie case: (1) that she was a member of a protected class; (2) that she was qualified for her … Br. at 3, this statement is clearly subject to a non-racial interpretation.

Klauder & Nunno Enterprises, Inc. v. Hereford Associates, Inc.

723 F. Supp. 336 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 25, 1989

Establishing a common origin for two possibly similar causes of action only begins the inquiry. … The moving party bears the burden of establishing the value of transfer.

Woods v. Era Med LLC

677 F. Supp. 2d 806 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 7, 2010

Woods could have ultimately qualify for [sic].” (PL’s Br. 4.) In response, defendants point out that, in his deposition, plaintiff answered “No” when asked if his offer of employment was “for a certain period of time.” … He clearly undertook the obligation to process the 0-1 visa application and to complete the appropriate forms. There is no evidence to support a claim that Era Med was to file the application instead of plaintiff.

LEATHERS v. GLAXOSMITHKLINE

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 7, 2021

Leathers] be reassigned to another department” and that her current position “has resulted in her experiencing significant pulmonary problems and has compromised her immune system functioning” which exacerbates … Therefore, in addition to being unable to establish a prima facie showing of causation, Plaintiff cannot establish pretext under the third prong of the McDonnell-Douglas framework.

Prudential Property & Casualty Insurance v. Hinson

277 F. Supp. 2d 468 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 12, 2003

Id. at 8 & attached pages following declarations. 2 The parties do not dispute that the Oley Township police vehicle qualifies as a “non-owned motor vehicle.” See id. at attached pages following declarations. … We, then examine whether the uncontested facts of this case establish that Edward Hinson’s use of the two police vehicles for approximately six years, for twenty to forty hours a month, fell under the Policy’s regular use

DEWS v. TICE

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 1, 2022

The Court must defer to a state-court judgment on the merits, unless the state court’s decision was “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal … Moreover, Petitioner has not shown that the sentencing judge’s decision was contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law, as required under AEDPA to

Knipe v. Smithkline Beecham

583 F. Supp. 2d 602 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 30, 2008

The FDA then issued a Public Health Advisory and corresponding Talk Paper, on October 27, 2003, stating that the “data do not clearly establish an association between the use of these drugs and increased suicidal thoughts … [Insert established name] is not approved for use in pediatric patients.

Lin v. Rohm & Haas Co.

865 F. Supp. 2d 649 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 26, 2012

Lin’s briefs as asserting claims arising out of the 2003 discovery requests — and clearly addressed those claims — I conclude that res judicata precludes Dr. … A plaintiff must first establish a prima facie case of retaliation. See id. at 342 .

United Parcel Service, Inc. v. United States Portal Service

455 F. Supp. 857 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 19, 1978

according to criteria established by Congress, id. §§ 3622 & 3623. … This argument is hinted at by the Postal Service in its brief, though not clearly articulated. 15 .