Case law

RANSOM-ELLISON

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 17, 2026

Ransom-Ellison argues her requested accommodation was reasonable because it would not have interfered with her ability to perform the essential functions of her job and was not clearly ineffective or outlandishly costly … If established, the burden shifts back to the plaintiff to show that the defendant’s justification is pretextual. Id.

TAYLOR v. TUMOLO

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

immunity protects the Marshals from the Bivens conspiracy claim; (4) qualified immunity protects the Marshals from the Bivens bystander liability claim; (5) qualified immunity protects Defendant Supervisor … Plaintiffs did none of these established steps.

RCN Telecom Services, Inc. v. DeLuca Enterprises, Inc.

413 F. Supp. 2d 464 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 12, 2005

Corp., 709 F.Supp. 582, 584 (E.D.Pa.1989) (“When Congress used the word ‘easements’ and qualified that word with the phrase ‘dedicated for compatible uses,’ it was referring to private easements but limited private easements … easement had been “dedicated” in the legal sense of the word, it noted: In the usual situation, a developer will file, record and present to a public governing body (a city or county for instance) a plat of his property clearly

RUSFELDT v. CITY OF READING

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

ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State… subjects or causes to be subject, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities … This case is clearly distinguishable from Grant. For the purposes of the Motion to Dismiss, Plaintiff has adequately established that he was arrested.

Abbotts Dairies Division of Fairmont Foods, Inc. v. Butz

389 F. Supp. 1 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 9, 1975

Clearly every price increase in the Delaware Valley during this emergency period was in bracket type integers. … These words hardly qualify as a clear statement that prices will change thereafter on a penny-by-penny basis as prices in another market area go up or down.

United States v. Galluppi

344 F. Supp. 1015 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 2, 1972

Have you ever been a member of any military organization or establishment? If so, state the name and address of same and give . reasons why you became a member. No___ 2. … It was the duty of the board to explain and provide the needed forms and information to the defendant so that he could clearly present his (IV-D) claim.

Sheet Metal Workers Local 441 Health & Welfare Plan v. Glaxosmithkline, PLC

737 F. Supp. 2d 380 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 7, 2010

The plans qualify as legal entities under the terms of the act. … It had, in the same opinion, dismissed plaintiffs claims because they could lie in tort, and because governmental immunity applied to any such claims under the Colorado Government Immunity Act (“CGIA”).

Institutionalized Juveniles v. Secretary of Public Welfare

459 F. Supp. 30 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 17, 1978

Nine of the named plaintiffs are juveniles committed as mentally ill who are under the age of fourteen; thus, they clearly are members of the class. … This class consists of approximately 3,153 members, 41 which is clearly sufficient to meet Rule 23(a)’s numerosity requirement.

Calio v. Pennsylvania Department of Transportation

101 F. Supp. 2d 325 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 26, 2000

A(l). 7 It is an established legal principle that a court must defer to an agency’s reasonable construction of a statute. See Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. … Additionally, this decision is clearly in keeping with the FHWA’s interpretation of the statute and regulations.

United States v. Philadelphia Marine Trade Ass'n/International Longshoremen's Ass'n Vacation Fund

471 F. Supp. 2d 518 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 11, 2007

In order to prevail in an action to recover an erroneous refund, the United States must establish (1) that a refund was paid to the taxpayer; (2) the amount of the refund; (3) that the United States’s recovery action was … Our Court of Appeals has noted that other courts have held “that an unnamed party may be so closely identified with a named party as to qualify as an ‘opposing party’ under Rule 13(a).”

United States v. Rohm and Haas Co.

790 F. Supp. 1255 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 24, 1992

Chemical Properties does not qualify as an innocent third party in terms delineated by CERCLA. Westwood Pharmaceuticals v. Nat. Fuel Gas Dist., 767 F.Supp. 456 (W.D.N.Y.1991); International Clinical Laboratories v. … November 9, 1990) (“Clearly, the term removal is not limited to on-site activity and includes the time needed to dispose of the removed material as well as time needed to evaluate the need for further activity.”).

Page v. Bancroft Neurohealth, Inc.

575 F. Supp. 2d 664 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 29, 2008

After establishing that ERISA applies to this action, we turn to our standard of review under ERISA. … The 1995 Severance plan allots a “Maximum Severance Payment” of 24 months’ pay to qualifying employees with more than 10 years of service to Bancroft. 76 The Third Circuit has held that “ERISA exempts severance and other

JACOBY JAMES v. HICKS

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 1, 2024

James avers that he “tried to sue Family Court before but [he] lost because Family court seems to be immune from federal law.” DI 2 at 8. … To establish that a consumer reporting agency is liable for failing to reinvestigate a dispute under FCRA, the consumer must establish that the consumer reporting agency had a duty to do so, and that it would have discovered

Allied World Surplus Lines Insurance Company v. Climax Technology Co., Ltd.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 31, 2025

Judgment on the pleadings may be granted only if the movant clearly establishes that there are no unresolved issues of material fact and that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Rosenau v. … It is not necessary for the Amended Complaint to specifically reference the technicalities of the “Devices” in order to sufficiently allege that the PERS device qualifies as a “Device” governed by the Agreement.

Firth-Sterling Steel Co. v. Bethlehem Steel Co.

216 F. 755 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 10, 1914

This brings it well within the established principle that the patentable novelty of a combination is not denied by proof that all its elements, taken separately, are old. Hailes v. Van Wormer, 87 U. S. 353 , 22 L. … Ed. 771 , ignores the distinction that the right of action given by the act of 1910 against the government does not grant immunity to any private trespasser upon the rights of patentees.

JOHN DOE 1 v. United States

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 18, 2021

The plaintiff has the burden of establishing subject matter jurisdiction. See Carpet Group Int’l v. Oriental Rug Imp. Ass’n, 227 F.3d 62, 69 (3d Cir. 2000) (citing Mortensen v. First Fed. … confidential,” “the bases upon which disclosure is feared or sought to be avoided, and the substantiality of these bases,” and “the magnitude of the public interest in maintaining the confidentiality of the litigant’s identity”—clearly

ALBRIGHT v. THE TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 18, 2019

To establish a prima facie case of discrimination under the ADA, Albright must show that: (1) he is disabled within the meaning of the ADA; (2) he is qualified to perform the essential functions of the job, with or without … Albright is unable to establish his prima facie case for intentional discrimination under the ADA, PHRA and PFPO because he fails to establish that he is qualified to perform the essential functions of the job, with or

In re Blood Reagents Antitrust Litigation

266 F. Supp. 3d 750 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 19, 2017

SOF ¶ 606, To qualify for the discounted Base tier, customers were required to purchase most of their blood reagents from Immucor. SOF ¶ 603. … As a preliminary matter, most, if not all, decisions by firms to raise prices qualify as business judgments — yet this Court is required to analyze them.

In Re Bowen

58 F. Supp. 286 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 29, 1944

But even here the courts have established clearly marked limitations upon the exercise of their remedial functions, which should be carefully observed. … (Emphasis supplied) The representatives of the government who acted on the application were fully qualified to judge and act independently.

COLLINS v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 7, 2020

“‘Policy is made when a decisionmaker possess[ing] final authority to establish municipal policy with respect to the action issues an official proclamation, policy, or edict.’” Estate of Roman v. … App’x 130, 133 (6th Cir. 2018) (rejecting qualified immunity where the defendant “was driving above the speed limit, swerving, and generally driving recklessly” and when the inmates begged him to slow down,