Case law

Dogmanits v. Capital Blue Cross

413 F. Supp. 2d 452 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 7, 2005

claim would still fail because she does not establish that she is a “qualified individual” within the meaning of the ADA. … The evidence put forth by Plaintiff is insufficient to establish that she was a “qualified individual” under the ADA.

Dickerson v. United States Steel Corp.

439 F. Supp. 55 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 25, 1977

That case held that discrimination can be established if it is shown: “(i) that (an individual) belongs to a racial minority; (ii) that he applied and was qualified for a job for which the employer was seeking applicants; … Clearly, the second most important element of this cause of action is proof of a conspiracy. Under Griffin , the law clearly reaches conspiracies between private individuals. In Lohr v.

Petrichko v. Kurtz

52 F. Supp. 2d 503 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 23, 1999

The former category encompasses cases “ ‘in which either it is readily apparent that the plaintiffs complaint lacks an arguable basis in law or that the defendants are clearly entitled to immunity from the suit,’ ” while … the latter includes cases “ ‘describing scenarios clearly removed from reality.’ ” Roman v.

Pokrandt v. Shields

773 F. Supp. 758 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 17, 1991

It is well established that state judicial entities are not “persons” within the meaning of section 1983 and, therefore, cannot be sued under section 1983. Mattas v. … In an effort to establish the jurisdictional predicate of state action, plaintiff alleges a vague and ambiguous conspiracy among defendant Warner and other defendants who clearly were acting under color of state law.

Atkins v. City of Reading

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 29, 2024

McClure is not entitled to qualified immunity. Sgt. McClure maintains, inter alia, that he arrested Plaintiff based on probable cause, and even if he did not have probable cause, he is entitled to qualified immunity. … McClure is not entitled to Qualified Immunity.

Schwartz v. County of Montgomery

843 F. Supp. 962 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 3, 1994

Schwartz of any of his constitutionally protected rights, privileges or immunities. … A government policy or custom, in turn, can be established in two ways.

MALDONADO v. FISCHER

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 19, 2025

The doctrine of qualified immunity shields public officials performing discretionary functions from liability insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … Additionally, if Defendant Fischer did violate Plaintiff’s constitutional rights, then he would not be entitled to qualified immunity, as these rights were clearly established at the time of the violation.

Price v. Tempo, Inc.

603 F. Supp. 1359 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 18, 1985

As to the first element of the defense, Tempo has not clearly established that the specifications for its product originated with the government. … First, the Brown court expressly noted that the government contract defense in Pennsylvania is distinct from the issue of sovereign immunity.

Catanese v. Martino

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 13, 2025

Qualified immunity Finally, the Court addresses Ingram’s qualified immunity defense. … the right at issue was “clearly established” at the time of the alleged misconduct.

LICAUSI v. ALLENTOWN SCHOOL DISTRICT

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

at issue was clearly established when the conduct took place. , 905 F.3d 711, 716 (3d Cir. 2018). … LiCausi’s speech retaliation claim fails on the merits, I need not assess whether the right was clearly established such that the Individual Defendants would be protected by qualified immunity.

Associated Builders & Contractors, E. Pa. Chapter, Inc. v. Cnty. of Northampton

376 F. Supp. 3d 476 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 25, 2019

qualifications and resources necessary to successfully perform District contracts in a timely, reliable and cost-effective manner by establishing clearly defined, minimum standards relating to contractor responsibility.. … This is especially true because mere certification that a bidder complies with the RCOs is insufficient to establish that a bidder is necessarily qualified.

Ruffin v. Beal

468 F. Supp. 482 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 10, 1978

This provision in itself is clearly not jurisdictional. Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528, 535 , 94 S.Ct. 1372 , 39 L.Ed.2d 577 (1974); Lynch v. … Phrases such as “essentially fictitious,” “wholly insubstantial,” “obviously frivolous” and “obviously without merit” have been established as the test for jurisdiction. See Hagans v.

STAGLIANO v. COLL

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 5, 2022

Qualified Prosecutorial Immunity The Prosecutorial Defendants contend that even if absolute prosecutorial immunity does not apply, qualified prosecutorial immunity applies … absolute or qualified prosecutorial immunity does not apply, the case would otherwise be dismissed pursuant to Younger v.

Mefford v. Prudential Insurance

99 F. Supp. 3d 551 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 26, 2015

hereafter established or maintained by an employer or by an employee organization, or by both, to the extent that such plan, fund, or program was established or is maintained for the purpose of providing certain benefits … In this fashion, we thus find Defendants’ interpretation of the plan to clearly be erroneous.

Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

826 F. Supp. 1506 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 29, 1993

Cochran, 546 F.Supp. 904, 910 (M.D.Tenn.1981) (“[T]he constitutional power of Congress under the commerce clause clearly permits some limitation on the states’ power of taxation. … S.Ct. 293 , 37 L.Ed. 132 (1893), whether "expenditures for local improvements are financed solely by municipalities without assistance from the state legislature may be an element in determining whether special assessments qualify

ERRINGTON v. CITY OF READING

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

Qualified Immunity – Review of Applicable Law “Qualified immunity is not merely immunity from liability, but rather immunity from suit, operating to free the recipient from the burdens of litigation … Where a plaintiff fails to establish the underlying offense through his or her allegations, “there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity.”

Flick v. James Monfredo, Inc.

356 F. Supp. 1143 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 3, 1973

Clearly the witness’ experience in the family business in no way qualified him as an expert in accident reconstruction. Callander v. … The loss of earning capacity need not be established by showing the change in earnings before and after the injury.

TALLEY v. DOYLE

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 14, 2019

In evaluating a qualified immunity defense, we ask two questions. … established, the inquiry ends and the official is entitled to qualified immunity.

GARCIA v. MCCORMICK

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 19, 2025

of any clearly established constitutional rights so as to waive these Defendants’ entitlement to qualified immunity.” . … None involves a violation of any clearly established constitutional right because Mr.

Jones v. City of Philadelphia

491 F. Supp. 284 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 12, 1980

Negligence, whether conclusorily described as “gross” or otherwise, is clearly insufficient under the standards set forth in Monell . … more persons conspire to prevent by force, intimidation, or threat, any citizen who is lawfully entitled to vote, from giving his support or advocacy in a legal manner, toward or in favor of the election of any lawfully qualified