Case law

DOE

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 31, 2026

However, the signed Notice of Custody Determination that the government provided to this Court after the hearing clearly establishes this contention is false. … Further, any time he is currently accruing does not qualify as a period of unlawful presence because he received employment authorization.

SJ Abstract d/b/a InterstateAbstract.com v. OLD REPUBLIC TITLE

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 14, 2021

While the warranty at issue in Frescati clearly covered the boat, the same is not true of the Agreement and Gaber’s personal information. … In contrast, the case law presents an ever-growing list of relationships which have not qualified. See Hershman, 17 F.

MONSKY

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 27, 2026

Standard of Review In the Third Circuit, motions to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) are governed by the well- established standard in Fowler v. … Indeed, he would be uniquely qualified to do so. As to the UTPCPL, Monsky has pleaded himself out of court. 6 See also Schwartz v.

VORN v. DONAHOE

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

However, they clearly did not alter the terms and conditions of Vorn’s employment or otherwise rise to the level of an adverse employment action. … Vorn cannot establish a prima facie case of retaliation on this basis.

TORRES v. United States

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 6, 2023

None of these witnesses are qualified to offer an opinion as to the medical reason for Ms. Torres’s allegedly changed behavior after the collision. H. … Because the FTCA provides a limited waiver of the United States’ sovereign immunity, its established procedures must be strictly construed. See White-Squire, 592 F.3d at 456; Livera v.

Marshall v. Fenstermacher

388 F. Supp. 2d 536 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 23, 2005

Hing, 151 Ariz. 386 , 728 P.2d 256, 264 (1985), aff'd. in part, vacated on other grounds, 151 Ariz. 403 , 728 P.2d 273, 283 (1986) (finding that acts of attorney on behalf of client were not privileged and did not provide immunity … Marshall asserts that Rumbaugh supports the existence of a claim for creditor fraud in Pennsylvania, the Court concludes that that case does not so clearly state that the tort of "creditor fraud” is actionable under Pennsylvania

MALDONADO-TORRES v. CUSTOMIZED DISTRIBUTION SERVICES, INC.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 21, 2020

In the letter, Gaito stated that Defendant did not have any open positions that Plaintiff was qualified for that also met her current restrictions. Id. … Plaintiff argues both of these instances constitute protected activity under Title VII as she “clearly opposed Defendant’s discriminatory decision not to accommodate her and to place her on forced leave.”

TEAGLE v. DOC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION'S

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 17, 2025

. § 1915A(b)(1), or that “seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief,” id. § 1915A(b)(2). … To establish an Eighth Amendment violation based on the conditions of confinement, a prisoner must establish that prison officials’ acts or omissions denied him “the minimal civilized measure of life’s necessities.”

MERRITT v. MANCINI

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 6, 2022

After discovery was completed, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, claiming Plaintiff cannot establish the necessary elements to prove his claims. … To determine whether specific conduct qualifies as excessive force, the court must examine its objective “reasonableness.” Graham, 490 U.S. at 395–96.

ROMAN v. COUNTY OF CHESTER

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 13, 2024

Thus, Roman has clearly alleged that he engaged in protected activity. … Sept. 22, 2021) (denying motion to dismiss ADA claim where the plaintiff pled that “he is a qualified individual with a disability based on his substance use disorder; he qualifies for the same treatment provided to [inmates

GOK v. POST & SCHELL PC

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 20, 2021

Furthermore, the statements and documents that Plaintiff references in her complaints are all protected under an absolute immunity for judicial proceedings. See, e.g., Weinik v. … Ct. 2017). 9 Plaintiff has since filed a “motion to leave certificate of merit [sic]” for the Defendant-attorneys. 10 Plaintiff has also failed to plead the existence of a qualifying relationship with Mercy Counsel

GOK v. ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 20, 2021

Furthermore, the statements and documents that Plaintiff references in her complaints are all protected under an absolute immunity for judicial proceedings. See, e.g., Weinik v. … Ct. 2017). 9 Plaintiff has since filed a “motion to leave certificate of merit [sic]” for the Defendant-attorneys. 10 Plaintiff has also failed to plead the existence of a qualifying relationship with Mercy Counsel

Freedman v. Amalgamated Sugar Co.

73 F.R.D. 322 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 21, 1976

In this Circuit it has been held: “Adequate representation depends on two factors: (a) the plaintiff’s attorney must be qualified, experienced, and generally able to conduct the proposed litigation, and (b) the plaintiff … The law relating to conspiracies and class determinations in federal antitrust cases clearly does not support defendants’ contention.

United States v. Caputo

633 F. Supp. 1479 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 1, 1986

It declined to follow Jacobs because there was no established practice in the Third Circuit of giving target warnings. … These conversations, according to the government, “clearly indicated” that defendants would lie before the grand jury. Id. at 6. Defendants object to the issuance of the sham subpoena on three grounds.

O'Keefe v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC

214 F.R.D. 266 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 2, 2003

subject matter jurisdiction inquiry; and (3) subject matter jurisdiction cannot be established indirectly when it could not be established directly. a. … Risks of Establishing Damages Establishing damages is the weakest link in the plaintiffs’ prima facie ease. 36 There *301 are factual and legal impediments that class counsel will need to overcome to establish damages.

OVERBY v. STEELE

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

The Office of Victims’ Services has authority under the statute to issue awards to qualifying individuals provided certain criteria are met. 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 11.707. … “Once an individual qualifies for welfare benefits, those benefits are a property interest protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” DiGiacomo v.

WASHINGTON v. SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

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

Here, the parties do not dispute that Plaintiff meets the first two prongs of a prima facie case—that he is a member of a protected class and was qualified for the position. … But “a full review of the record clearly shows . . . that [Plaintiff] tried to give Defendants the benefit of the doubt. When that did not work, he tried to have the issues dealt with at the lowest level.” (Id.)

CHONG v. 7-ELEVEN, INC.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 4, 2020

MT argues that summary judgment against it should be denied because 7-Eleven has not clearly established the existence of MT’s breach. MT points to Mr. Newman’s deposition testimony and claims that Mr. … Newman may have admitted that “it’s possible” that 7-Eleven’s financial audits were “inaccurate,” he also qualified this statement by explaining that it was “highly unlikely.” Jd. at 90:7-12.

STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY v. ROCKINMUSIK LLC

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 19, 2023

“Judgment will not be granted unless the movant clearly establishes there are no material issues of fact, and he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. … “The burden is on the insured to establish coverage under an insurance policy. . . . It is the insurer, however, that bears the burden of establishing the applicability of an exclusion in an insurance contract.” Id.

SANDERS v. BERRYHILL

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 24, 2021

Moreover, she claims the Commissioner’s sole argument—that the Commissioner is “not required to ‘sua sponte raise an Appointments Clause issue that was not raised by the claimant’”—is “clearly inadequate to establish substantial … But Lucia “did not define what qualifies as a ‘timely challenge,’” id., and it was not until January 2020 that the Third Circuit in Cirko found “claimants for Social Security disability benefits [are not required to] exhaust