Case law

FANTAUZZI v. WETZEL

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 29, 2019

immunity.*4 A. … Levi, 696 F.3d 352, 367 (3d Cir. 2012) (confirming even an unsentenced inmate “had a clearly established constitutional right to have prison officials protect him from inmate violence.”). 3 See id.

Northeast Emergency Medical Associates, P. C. v. Califano

470 F. Supp. 1111 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 11, 1979

This review disclosed that Pennsylvania Blue Shield had established — and paid reassigned benefits into — six such accounts. … True, plaintiffs here allege that the defendants’ reading of section 1842(b)(5) is clearly inconsistent with the plain meaning of that provision.

United States v. Holland

378 F. Supp. 144 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 26, 1974

Ehly claims further that the prosecution failed to establish the chain of custody of the photographs, thus presenting a clear possibility of multiple hearsay. We disagree. … Either method would clearly suggest to the jury that the defendant had been in trouble with the law, in violation of the principle of United States v.

Flannick v. First Union Home Equity Bank

134 F. Supp. 2d 389 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 15, 2001

“Disbursement” clearly refers to the transfer of funds from the settlement agent to the borrowers. North Carolina law therefore bars the charging of interest on funds prior to disbursement to the borrower. … The requirements of the rule are met if (1) plaintiffs’ interests are not antagonistic to those of other members of the class he or she seeks to represent, and (2) plaintiffs’ representatives are qualified, experienced and

Keith Smith v. WireCo WorldGroup, WireCo WorldGroup, Inc., Corporation Doe (1-3), and John Doe (1-3)

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 1, 2026

The defendant in Holland terminated the plaintiff’s 2 The bargain referred to is one where the employer assumed liability without fault for a work- related injury in exchange for immunity from potentially larger damage … See Kuney, 578 A.2d at 1287 (noting that a wrongful delay of compensation benefits is “clearly a matter pertaining to a workers’ compensation claim . . .

CORBIN v. TICE

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 22, 2021

issue at trial (whether petitioner fired his gun in self-defense) was again heavily based on eyewitness testimony, this time, of a single prosecution eyewitness who was uncooperative with authorities until he received immunity … This deference means that habeas can only be granted to Petitioner if the state court adjudication “(1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal

HOLLIDAY v. PRIME CARE MEDICAL

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 25, 2021

The timing of the allegedly retaliatory behavior relative to the constitutionally protected conduct may establish a causal link between the two for purposes of establishing motivation. … Pennsylvania has not waived its sovereign immunity, and because Congress has not explicitly abrogated immunity through authorizing legislation, the Eleventh Amendment operates as a bar to claims for damages under § 1983

VANDERHOEF

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 23, 2026

Defendants deny these allegations and, further, assert immunity for both the federal and state law claims against them. (ECF 8). … Good cause means “that disclosure will work a clearly defined and serious injury to the party seeking closure. The injury must be shown with specificity.”

THOMAS v. THE WELLINGTON AT HERSHEY MILLS

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 5, 2025

. § 1915(e)(2)(B), which requires the Court to screen and dismiss the SAC if it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks relief from an immune defendant. … Even post-Twombly, it has been noted that a plaintiff is not required to establish the elements of a prima facie case but instead, need only put forth allegations that raise a reasonable expectation that discovery will

BROOKS v. PREVENTION POINT PHILADELPHIA, INC.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 28, 2021

Discrimination With regard to Plaintiff’s claims of racial discrimination, a prima facie claim requires that plaintiff show that he (1) is a member of a protected class; (2) was qualified … Hostile Work Environment The Amended Complaint also appears—albeit not clearly—to assert a claim for a hostile work environment.

PATLAKH v. O'MALLEY

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 25, 2024

The disability claimant bears the burden of establishing steps one through four. … . § 416.913a(b)(1) for the proposition that State agency psychologists are “highly qualified and experts in Social Security disability determination”)).

CRAIG v. HARRY

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 11, 2025

As the Commonwealth has not waived its Eleventh Amendment immunity for lawsuits filed in federal court, see 42 Pa.C.S. § 8521, it and its departments, as well as their officials sued in their official capacities, are immune … However, despite qualifying for both the educational and artistic exception under the DC-ADM 803, [his] book was denied.” Resp. at 54.

Delaware County Intermediate Unit 25 v. Martin K.

831 F. Supp. 1206 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 15, 1993

Judge Hutchinson suggested that this Circuit follow the standard established by the First Circuit in Burlington v. … I can’t really say how much less you can have and make it work, though some of our school systems clearly do that with some of our children.”).

WILLIAMS v. THE GEO GROUP INC.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 17, 2022

. § 1983, which “gives a federal remedy against state officials who, acting under color of state law, deprive ‘any citizen of the United States . . . of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the [U.S.] … Any amended complaint should clearly describe the factual basis for Williams’s claims against the relevant defendants and state how each defendant was involved in the alleged denial of his Constitutional rights.

Behrend v. Comcast Corp.

264 F.R.D. 150 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 7, 2010

Comcast established that it never licensed CSN Philadelphia to DBS companies, either before it established its cluster, during the formation of the cluster, or after clustering had been achieved. … Pennington, 381 U.S. 657 , 85 S.Ct. 1585 , 14 L.Ed.2d 626 (1965) (holding that an individual is immune from antitrust liability for exercising First Amendment right to petition the government).

Braxton v. United Parcel Service, Inc.

806 F. Supp. 537 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 28, 1992

grievance and appellate procedures concluding with binding arbitration by a joint employer-union panel, both sides are contractually bound by the decision, and the result is “[sjubject to very limited judicial review”, qualified … That’s clearly not the case. Q. But is it your view, then, that all Union officers on the UPS Atlantic Area Parcel Grievance Committee were against Mr. Carey? A. No.

Diehl v. Barnhart

357 F. Supp. 2d 804 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 7, 2005

Establishing Eligibility Under the Social Security Act To establish a right to Disability Insurance Benefits, a claimant must show that he suffers from a disability as defined under the Social Security Act. … This characterization of Plaintiffs impairments does not clearly qualify as a functional limitation under Part B, nevertheless, it could reasonably be viewed as describing a limitation in social functioning or a limitation

PECO ENERGY COMPANY (INCORRECTLY NAMED IN THE UNDERLYING ACTION AS "PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY, AND PECO ENERGY COMPANY A/K/A AND D/B/A PECO A/K/A AND D/B/A EXELON CORP.") v. NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE CO.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 18, 2022

Judgment on the Pleadings A motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c) for judgment on the pleadings will be granted only if “the movant clearly establishes that no material … See id. at 675.5 5 Nationwide argues that Ramara does not control, because, in Ramara, the primary insured was immune from suit under the Workers’ Compensation Act.

Kimbrough v. Holiday Inn

478 F. Supp. 566 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 31, 1979

. § 2071 : The Supreme Court and all courts established by Act of Congress may from time to time prescribe rules for the conduct of their business. … Clearly administrative agencies with similar adjudicative responsibilities as the arbitration board have long been recognized as not only proper but essential to the functioning of an efficient judicial system.

MUNOZ v. GOLDBERG, MILLER & RUBIN, P.C.

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

July 23, 2012) (“A disagreement over hours worked or compensation due clearly establishes a bona fide dispute.”) (citations and internal quotations omitted). … In addition, Plaintiffs risk being unable to establish liability at trial due to an absence of time records. (Id. at 7-8.)