Case law

HILLMER v. ESURANCE PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 10, 2021

This definition clearly excludes persons who are mere visitors to the residence, however frequently they may visit and however certain they may be that they will always be taken in. … In order for a child to qualify as a resident of a parent’s household, there must be more than periodic or intermittent social visits.

BENJAMIN v. JBS S.A.

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

Therefore, the instant matter is clearly not a “prototypical case of Grable jurisdiction.” See MHA LLC, 629 F. App’x at 413 n.6 (citations omitted). … However, even assuming consideration of outside documents is permissible, the documents that have been presented do not clearly establish that Souderton was Enock’s employer.

Boncher v. 3M Company

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 14, 2025

The opinions of the general causation experts are offered to establish that the Bair Hugger is capable of causing PJIs in surgical patients, and the specific causation experts’ opinions are offered to establish that the … Philadelphia Trust Co., 2024 WL 5057595, at *3 (quoting Power, 2023 WL 2705237, at *6); see Pineda, 520 F.3d at 245 (finding an expert was qualified “even though he may not have been the ‘best qualified’ expert or did

Dixon-Rollins v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.

753 F. Supp. 2d 452 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 23, 2010

Reckless disregard of an FCRA requirement qualifies as a willful violation. Safeco Ins. Co. of America v. Burr, 551 U.S. 47, 71 , 127 S.Ct. 2201 , 167 L.Ed.2d 1045 (2007). … The Cushman decision clearly instructs consumer reporting agencies that they must go beyond the original source in certain circumstances.

CHAMBARLAIN v. CAPOZZA

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 30, 2020

Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), or any other clearly established Federal law. Petitioner has filed Objections to the Magistrate Judge’s recommendations regarding all five claims. … However, in spite of Petitioner’s disagreement with the state court’s analysis, we cannot conclude that the state court’s decision “involved an unreasonable application of[] clearly established Federal law as

RODRIGUEZ v. NORTHEAST COMMUNITY CENTER FOR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH

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

It further argues that, given his admission that he was late to work on multiple occasions, Rodriguez has not shown that he was qualified for the job from which he was terminated. … Nevertheless, Rodriguez has clearly alleged that that he was held to a much stricter standard than other comparable employees, and he has the right to attempt to prove this factual assertion.

T.M. v. Quakertown Community School District

251 F. Supp. 3d 792 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 19, 2017

reading and math curriculum, he determined that “her recommendations about reading, math, speech and language were beyond her specialty. areas.” 32 The district’s special education staff members, on the other hand, are well qualified … In fact, McGinnis conceded that T.M. made “significant progress” and “clearly excels” in a variety of areas, including, but not limited to, physical motor skills (handwriting and typing); 98 repetitive tasks, such as assembling

United States v. Ezeiruaku

754 F. Supp. 420 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 20, 1990

Ezeiruaku maintains that only “routine” border searches qualify for exemption from the Fourth Amendment’s probable cause and warrant requirements. … By stark contrast, there are no established procedures for out-going passengers.

MAMMEN, M.D., M.P.H. v. THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 26, 2021

I have also told you clearly how it has been affecting me negatively professionally. … She suggests that she and other qualified female faculty members are unable to succeed in the Department, while men advance.

KEITA v. DELTA COMMUNITY SUPPORTS, INC.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 5, 2020

The relevant provisions of each statute have “nearly identical language,” and require the same elements to establish a prima facie claim.1 See Driscoll v. Lincoln Tech. Inst., 702 F. Supp. 2d 542, 545–46 (E.D. … Plaintiff could have pleaded more clearly, indicating precisely what she communicated to her supervisor regarding her removal.

STARNES v. THREDUP INC

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 10, 2023

Starnes clearly did not allege that only one ‘employee’ made gender-related statements to him.”).) … to be relevant to establishing a prima facie case of discrimination.”

BENNETT v. COLON-ORTIZ

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 22, 2025

Accordingly, negligence or medical malpractice is not sufficient to establish deliberate indifference. … We find that Plaintiff’s grievance sufficiently exhausted his ADA claim because it clearly stated the factual basis for that claim.

CONCEPCION v. BECK

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 16, 2022

Plaintiff argues that there was no reasonable suspicion because the rationale provided was clearly a pretext. Resp. 2. … Since Plaintiff has not established that this violation was dismissed, the malicious prosecution claim must also be dismissed on these grounds.

FENNELL v. COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS MANAGEMENT, LLC

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 16, 2022

Generally, to establish a prima facie case of sexual orientation discrimination, a plaintiff must show that: (1) he was a member of a protected class; (2) he was qualified for his position; (3) he suffered an adverse employment … An employee’s decision to report discriminatory behavior cannot immunize that employee from those petty slights or minor annoyances that often take place at work and that all

SHARKOSKI v. VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION OF GREATER PHILADELPHIA

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 6, 2024

To establish a prima facie retaliation claim under the FMLA, Mr. … Inconsistencies in a defendant’s description of termination can help establish pretext.

GREENE v. KAUFFMAN

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 21, 2022

A court cannot grant habeas relief unless the state court adjudication “(1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the … To prevail in demonstrating a state court result was contrary to clearly established federal law, Petitioner must demonstrate that the state court’s application of federal law was “objectively unreasonable” as opposed

Sanford v. Bracewell & Guiliani, LLP

6 F. Supp. 3d 568 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 20, 2014

Sanford argue that because they lack legal training, they do not qualify as sophisticated clients and could not be expected to understand the fee agreement and arbitration clause. See Doc. No. 16 ("[Mr. … The Engagement Letter clearly noted that it contained a binding arbitration provision.

Kerrigan v. Villei

22 F. Supp. 2d 419 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 15, 1998

Moreover, I conclude that the evidence did not establish that the third party defendants negligently misrepresented information to Villei. … Indeed, the summary sheet of the transaction sent from Taubman to Villei clearly revealed that the transaction was to involve prime bank guarantees.

Burlington v. News Corp.

55 F. Supp. 3d 723 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 24, 2014

Vance answered the question of who qualifies as a “supervisor” for purposes of harassment claims under Title VII. … Rather, Evans clearly was “an actor in the events that are the subject of’ this action. Staub, 131 S.Ct. at 1193.

FORD v. SAUL

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 22, 2022

for DIB, claimants must establish their condition became fully disabling before their DLI. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.130, 404.132; see also Jakubowski v. … To be entitled to relief, Ford must show “the statutory provision [] clearly cause[d] harm,” not Saul himself. Collins, 141 S. Ct. at 1789.