Case law

BACON v. MERAKEY

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 31, 2023

While Plaintiff does not contest this, he elsewhere alleges that his email to Sachs about Alexander “speaks for itself” and clearly alleges gender discrimination. … Gender Discrimination To establish a claim of gender discrimination under Title VII, a plaintiff-employee must first establish a prima facie case. Jones v.

COCKERILL v. CORTEVA, INC.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 17, 2023

Co., 762 F.3d 711, 720–23 (8th Cir. 2014) (emphasizing that CIGNA “changed the legal landscape by clearly spelling out the possibility of an equitable remedy under ERISA for breaches of fiduciary obligations” and that … However, plaintiffs need not exhaust when they assert rights established by the ERISA statute. Id.

ATAIN INSURANCE COMPANY v. BASEMENT WATERPROOFING SPECIALIST, INC. D/B/A OLD FAMILY CONSTRUCTION

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 3, 2021

Judgment on the pleadings is appropriate if “the movant clearly establishes that no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Rosenau v. … Thus, they do not qualify as an ‘occurrence’ under a general liability policy.”). In Specialty Surfaces International, Inc. v.

ALLIANCE OF NONPROFITS FOR INSURANCE, RISK RETENTION GROUP v. LM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 5, 2024

Montgomery qualified as an insured under the ANI Policy due to the fact that she was acting as a volunteer employee of Access Services at the time of the accident. ECF No. 1 ¶ 31; ECF No. 7 ¶ 31. Therefore, Ms. … A motion for judgment on the pleadings “will not be granted unless the movant clearly establishes there are no material issues of fact, and [they] [are] entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Sikirica v.

BAGDON v. BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 30, 2021

Unisys, 58 F.3d at 902 (“[A]ny retiree's right to…benefits under a plan can only be found if it is established by the terms of the ERISA- governed employee benefit plan”); see also CIGNA Corp. v. … Co., 96 F.3d 1544, 1553 (3d Cir. 1996) (“We have never clearly defined ‘extraordinary circumstances,’ relying instead on case law to establish its parameters.”).

GRIER

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 13, 2026

. § 1915(e)(2)(B) requires the Court to screen and dismiss the Complaint if it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks relief from an immune defendant. … It is the plaintiff’s burden to establish diversity of citizenship. Gibbs v. Buck, 307 U.S. 66, 72 (1939); see also Quaker State Dyeing & Finishing Co., Inc. v.

CADDICK v. TASTY BAKING COMPANY

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 12, 2021

See Wood, 2020 WL 7711409, at *6 (“Saltz, Mongeluzzi & Bendesky, P.C.— are qualified to ‘fairly and adequately represent the interests of the class.’”). 2. … These include: (1) whether plaintiffs can establish that they are employees and not independent contractors; (2) whether any of the FLSA overtime exemptions apply; and (3) whether plaintiffs receive “wages” under Pennsylvania

GROTE v. AMERICAN ECONOMY INSURANCE COMPANY

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 30, 2025

When the movant is the defendant, they have the burden of demonstrating that the plaintiff “has failed to establish one or more essential elements of [his] case.” Burton v. … But where the public adjuster nonetheless possesses “skill or knowledge greater than the average layman” that qualifies him to opine on causation, he may do so.

WILLIAMS v. SUPERINTENDENT, SCI SOMERSET

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

be granted with respect to any claim that was adjudicated on the merits in State court proceedings unless the adjudication . . . resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly … Mar. 24, 2014) (determining that the claim was procedurally defaulted because it was not raised on appeal from denial of PCRA relief and that “[a]ny failings of Petitioner’s appellate PCRA counsel would not qualify for

FAGGIOLO v. BOROUGH OF RIDLEY PARK

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 8, 2024

In 2019, the Borough enacted another series of ordinances establishing the real estate tax rate, trash collection fees, and sewer fees for 2020. (Id. at 6-8.) … Next, because (1) the township’s code required most improved buildings to be connected to the town’s sewer system and (2) in excess of 90% of qualifying properties were, in fact, connected to this system, the court found

BREEN v. RELIANCE STANDARD LIFE INS CO

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 2, 2023

Plaintiff is clearly qualified to perform several alternative occupations, and Defendant was reasonable in concluding that Plaintiff has the functional capacity to perform sedentary level work. … that an award of social security disability “does not in itself establish that an administrator’s decision was arbitrary and capricious.”

KEEN v. C.R. BARD, INC.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 19, 2020

Negligent Misrepresentation Claim A plaintiff must establish the following four elements to establish a negligent misrepresentation claim in Pennsylvania: “(1) a misrepresentation of a material fact; (2) … Keen fails to present any evidence establishing that Bard made a misrepresentation of material fact to Dr.

VALUE DRUG COMPANY v. TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS, U.S.A., INC.

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

Value Drug evidently concedes the point, as Value Drug does not address Takeda’s argument—rather only arguing it has adequately plead a conspiracy and Takeda’s patents do not immunize anticompetitive conduct. … The plaintiff must establish those contacts with reasonable particularity . . .

WILLIAMS v. TICE

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 26, 2024

First, the decision to deny Petitioner’s Motion to Suppress was not contrary to clearly established federal law. As the United States Supreme Court stated in Williams v. … warrant habeas relief and the decision of the trial court was not contrary to clearly established federal law).

SPEROW v. BERKS COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 8, 2020

As a condition of the PFA, Sperow was required within twenty-four hours to relinquish any firearms to the Berks County Sheriff’s Department or a qualified third party. (Id.) … A plaintiff commencing an action in federal court bears the burden of establishing federal jurisdiction. See Lincoln Ben. Life Co. v.

Quilloin v. Tenet Healthsystem Philadelphia, Inc.

763 F. Supp. 2d 707 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 20, 2011

No discovery or motion practice cutoffs have been established. No trial date has been scheduled. … Duress is not established merely by showing that the release was given under pressure of the financial circumstances disclosed here.”); Reed v.

VALUE DRUG COMPANY v. TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS, U.S.A., INC.

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

Value Drug evidently concedes the point, as Value Drug does not address Takeda’s argument—rather only arguing it has adequately plead a conspiracy and Takeda’s patents do not immunize anticompetitive conduct. … The plaintiff must establish those contacts with reasonable particularity . . .

E.O.H.C. v. BARR

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 22, 2020

No other evidence in the record establishes that Mia suffers from a disability. … To the extent that testimony was intended to establish an irreparable injury, it was both unnecessary and, as discussed above, unconvincing. Separation itself establishes an injury for both Mr. H and Mia.

VALUE DRUG COMPANY v. TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS, U.S.A., INC.

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

Value Drug evidently concedes the point, as Value Drug does not address Takeda’s argument—rather only arguing it has adequately plead a conspiracy and Takeda’s patents do not immunize anticompetitive conduct. … The plaintiff must establish those contacts with reasonable particularity . . .

BUTAKIS v. NVR, INC.

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

NVR has identified 77 individuals, who qualify as settlement class members. (Doc. … Kenney, Esq., of Sauder Schelkopf LLC—are qualified to “fairly and adequately represent the interests of the class.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(4).