Case law

Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen & Enginemen v. Reading Co.

279 F. Supp. 948 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 31, 1968

In Hoffman v. … Arbitration Board No. 282, appointed pursuant to Public Law 88-108, 77 Stat. 132, 45 U.S.C.A. § 157 et seq. .

Delaware River Port Authority v. United States Lines, Inc.

331 F. Supp. 441 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 1, 1971

It is for the Federal Maritime Commission as the competent administrative board to determine if the conduct alleged here is in fact illegal. Far East Conference v. … Trans-Pacific Freight Conference of Japan v. Federal Maritime Board, 302 F.2d 875 (D.C.C.A. 1962). Injunctive relief has frequently been granted by the Courts as an adjunct to the administrative process.

Gans v. Gray

612 F. Supp. 608 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 24, 1985

Citing no law to the contrary, plaintiff asks this court to follow what he believes is the holding in Winter v. Brown, 365 A.2d 381, 385 (D.C.App.1976). … In Pashak v.

STERNER v. MCP HOLDINGS CORP.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 3, 2025

Pa. 2012) (citing Lightfoot v. … (collecting cases)). 71 Lafferty v. St. Riel, 495 F.3d 72, 77 (3d Cir. 2007) (first citing Jumara v. State Farm Ins.

Rodriguez v. Panarello

119 F. Supp. 3d 331 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 10, 2015

Patrick v. Moorman, 536 Fed.Appx. 255, 259 (3d Cir. 2013); Brown v. … .”); Hinton v. City of Elwood, Kan., 997 F.2d 774, 782 (10th Cir.1993); see also Brown, 484 Fed.Appx. at 681 (collecting cases)..

In re Terry

543 B.R. 173 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 21, 2015

Nor is it certain that anyone will petition the Tax Review Board for relief. The City has not suffered a direct injury. … Hess v. Potts, 32 Pa. 407, 410-11 (1859); Shalemiller v. McCarty, 55 Pa. 186, 188 (1867); City of Phila. v. Miller, 182 Pa.Super. 239 , 126 A.2d 812, 815 (Pa.Super.1956).

Bucks County Cable TV, Inc. v. United States

299 F. Supp. 1325 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 28, 1969

In United States v. … In Farmer v.

Pyle v. Meritor Savings Bank

821 F. Supp. 1072 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 27, 1993

Litigation v. Andersen, 532 F.2d 842, 846 (2nd Cir.1976); Doe v. Kerwood, 969 F.2d 165, 168 (5th Cir.1992); Structural Systems, Inc. v. … Litigation v.

Philadelphia Housing Authority v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development

86 F.R.D. 448 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 14, 1980

In a triad of cases, Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner, 387 U.S. 136 , 87 S.Ct. 1507 , 18 L.Ed.2d 681 (1967) (Abbott); Toilet Goods Ass’n v. … Exxon Corp. v. F. T. C., 588 F.2d 895 , 901 (3d Cir. 1978).

McDonough v. Toys" R" US, Inc.

638 F. Supp. 2d 461 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 15, 2009

See U.S. v. Brown Univ., 5 F.3d 658 , 668-69 (3d Cir.1993). … See Brown Univ., 5 F.3d at 668-69; Leegin, 127 S.Ct. at 2719-20 .

FLAMER v. BRADLEY

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 23, 2024

Shorter v. United States, 12 F.4th 366, 374 (3d Cir. 2021) abrogation on other grounds recognized by Fisher v. Hollingsworth, 115 F.4th 197 (3d Cir. 2024) (quoting Perez v. … .”); Brown v. Buck , 614 F. App’x 590, 592 (3d Cir. 2015) (per curiam) (“Brown alleged that the officers used excessive force against him when they shot him on March 22, 2011, and his claim accrued then.”).

Morrow v. Crosby

418 F. Supp. 933 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 1, 1976

The defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the basis of the administrative record was denied on the authority of Sperling v. … Supreme Court in Chandler v. Roudebush, 425 .

Northeast Women's Center, Inc. v. McMonagle

689 F. Supp. 465 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 31, 1988

At trial, plaintiff sought to introduce minutes of the Board of Directors meeting of the Coalition. Defense counsel duly objected as to relevance. … V.

RHINO SERVICES, LLC v. DEANGELO BROTHERS, INC.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 11, 2023

(citing Brown & Brown, Inc. v. Cola, 745 F. Supp. 2d 588, 623 (E.D. … See Whitehead v.

Hilbert v. Flemming

189 F. Supp. 344 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 18, 1960

As the court stated in Kraynak v. … National Labor Relations Board, 1951, 340 U.S. 474 , 71 S.Ct. 456 , 95 L.Ed. 456 , we ‘may not substitute [our] inferences for those of the [Appeals Council] which are supported by substantial evidence.’ Ferenz v.

Freitick v. Sms Rail Lines

748 F. Supp. 2d 431 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 17, 2010

See Sheridan v. NGK Metals Corp., 609 F.3d 239, 251 (3d Cir.2010); Am. Eagle Outfitters v. Lyle & Scott Ltd., 584 F.3d 575, 581 (3d Cir.2009) (citing Anderson v. … See Carter v. Union R.R. Co., 438 F.2d 208, 210-211 (3d Cir.1971). 25 . See Kimbler v. Pittsburgh & L.E.R. Co., 331 F.2d 383, 386 (3d Cir.1964). 26 . See Felton v. Southeastern Pa. Transp.

Fialkowski v. Greenwich Home for Children, Inc.

683 F. Supp. 103 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 30, 1987

Board of Education of East Windsor Regional School District v. Diamond, 808 F.2d 987, 996 (3d Cir.1986); Davenport v. Saint Mary Hospital, 633 F.Supp. 1228, 1232 (E.D.Pa.1986). … Lugar v.

Jackson v. Cuyler

432 F. Supp. 1296 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 15, 1977

Ford v. Board of Managers of New Jersey State Prison, 407 F.2d 937 (3d Cir. 1969); Carter v. Cuyler, 415 F.Supp. 852 (E.D.Pa.1976); Johnson v. Avery, 393 U.S. 483 , 89 S.Ct. 747 , 21 L.Ed.2d 718 (1969). … Household Finance Corporation, 405 U.S. 538 , 92 S.Ct. 1113 , 31 L.Ed.2d 424 (1972) such as Russell v. Bodner, 489 F.2d 280 (3d Cir. 1973); Lathan v. Oswald, 359 F.Supp. 85 (S.D.N.Y.1973); Schumate v.

JONES LANG LASHALL AMERICAS, INC v. JAFFE

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 22, 2024

Brown & Brown, Inc. v. Cola, No. 10-3898, 2011 WL 4380445, at *4 (E.D. Pa. Sept. 20, 2011) (quoting Henricks Com. Park. LLC v. Main Steel Polishing Co., No. 09-23, 2009 WL 2524348, at *3 (W.D. Pa. Aug. 18, 2009)). … See Brown v. Cushman & Wakefield, 235 F. Supp. 2d 291, 294 (S.D.N.Y 2002).

MOORE v. THE CHESTER COUNTY COURTS

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 10, 2022

Claim Against the State Parole Board Mr. Moore’s claim against the (Pennsylvania) State Parole Board fails because the Board is also immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment. See Fenton v. … (citing Harper v. Jeffries, 808 F.2d 281, 284 n.4 (3d Cir. 1986))). Moreover, as a state agency, the State Parole Board is not a “person” against whom a civil rights action may be brought under Section 1983.