Case law

Krisa v. Equitable Life Assurance Society

113 F. Supp. 2d 694 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 6, 2000

Claiming that Equitable has not demonstrated that its position was “clearly correct,” Mr. … Clearly, fees and costs incurred on a withdrawn claim are arguably unreasonable.

Pannebaker v. Trotta

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · May 8, 2024

immunity. … we conclude that Pannebaker’s Eighth Amendment claims fail on their merits, we decline to address the defendants’ qualified immunity argument.

Brabham v. Owens

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 20, 2022

Plaintiff must establish that Pennsylvania law creates a 32 The Complaint does not address, nor must we decide at this juncture, if the doctrine of qualified immunity protects Defendant Owens from suit. … However, Plaintiff may want to consider whether Defendant Owens would be entitled to qualified immunity and thus be immune from some or all of Plaintiff’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims against him.

FG v. Jersey Shore Area School District

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · May 11, 2023

was subjected and, in any event, the individual defendant would be entitled to qualified immunity.40 1. … immunity. 58 Mulholland v.

Groves v. Heckler

599 F. Supp. 830 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 20, 1984

Thus, the EAJA mandates an award of counsel fees to a qualified prevailing party. Tressler v. Heckler, 748 F.2d 146 at 149 (3d Cir. Oct. 19, 1984). In Brown v. … While plaintiff claimed he had been disabled since November 1974, the medical evidence established a contrary conclusion.

Logory v. County of Susquehanna

277 F.R.D. 135 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 6, 2011

Of course, the record well establishes that all strip searched detainees were deloused. … Defendant acknowledges that “the testimony ... clearly establishes that there is no separate delousing policy at the Susquehanna County Jail; no one is deloused unless he is strip searched.” (Doc. 49 at 15).

F.E.I. Company v. United States

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 12, 2019

In undertaking this inquiry, no particular background or credentials are necessary to establish the requisite specialized knowledge because “a broad range of knowledge, skills, and training qualify an expert.” … the duty of establishing causation.

Loughney v. Correctional Care, Inc.

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 28, 2021

Therefore, like in Dean, the MHPA does not apply and Plaintiff need only establish negligence—not gross negligence. … Plaintiff had clearly pled negligence and has included a certificate of merit from an appropriate professional indicating that [Lynady’s] treatment fell short of the standard of care.” (id.

Garnett v. Kepner

541 F. Supp. 241 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · May 17, 1982

this background the Court held: The question with which we now deal is the narrower one of whether Congress, in enacting § 1979 [§ 1983], meant to give a remedy to parties deprived of constitutional rights, privileges and immunities … oath subject to the penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding, or in a deposition .... ” The first affidavit and the *249 hearsay testimony of investigator Gochenour as to what Barilik told him do not qualify

Chambers v. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.

359 F. Supp. 3d 268 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 14, 2019

The parallel use of "such" may indicate the qualifying phrase "as may be required by state law or regulation" modifies both "such larger unit" and the later phrase "such unit," even though the qualifying phrase is sandwiched … Plaintiffs use the word "marketed" as their textual hook in a bid to establish a latent, if not patent, ambiguity.

United States v. Marisol, Inc.

725 F. Supp. 833 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 31, 1989

Initially, the complaint clearly avers that the site was a waste facility. See document 1 of record at ¶ 14-18. … doctrine that the sovereign is immune from equitable doctrines when it asserts public rights.

Walker v. Anders

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

, let alone clearly establish, a right to intervention in other contexts.”); Lozano v. … established right).

Gavilan-Cruz

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 6, 2026

Only “persons” are subject to suit under Section 1983; state agencies such as the DOC do not qualify. See Will v. Mich. … States may waive this immunity if they choose, but Pennsylvania has explicitly not waived its immunity with respect to claims brought under Section 1983. See 42 PA. CONS. STAT. ANN. § 8521(b); Downey v. Pa.

Daniels v. Damiter

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 18, 2024

, or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States. … This case is clearly barred by Heck.

Harrisburg Hospital v. Shalala

48 F. Supp. 2d 467 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 31, 1999

Governing Statutes and Regulations The Medicare program was established in 1965 under Title XVIII of the Social Security Act (the “Act”) to provide health insurance to the aged and disabled. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1395 — 1395cc. … Therefore, it is important that we clearly differentiate between approved educational activities in which a hospital may be engaged and other training costs a hospital may incur.

Milton v. Angle

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 19, 2022

Lastly, in the qualified immunity section of his amended complaint, Milton avers that Ruch, Ross, and Rausch failed to provide “safe and adequate housing and shelter (constant unit and cell flooding from the sewer drains … immunity heading, where he states that Houdeshell’s and Angle’s repeated refusals to provide adequate meals “correspond with complaints and grievances filed,” which Milton contends is “clearly retaliation against” him

Becker v. Carbon County

177 F. Supp. 3d 841 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 8, 2016

A defendant bears the burden of establishing that a plaintiffs complaint fails to state a claim. See Gould Elecs. v. United States, 220 F.3d 169, 178 (3d Cir.2000). … The Torts Claims Act provides for certain limitations on immunity, however, none are relevant to the current case. .

Albright v. Keystone Rural Health Center

320 F. Supp. 2d 286 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · May 27, 2004

Failure to comply with the statute is ‘an affirmative defense which the defendant has the burden of establishing.’” Hughes v. U.S., 263 F.3d 272, 278 (3d Cir.2001) (citations omitted). … DISCUSSION In enacting the FTCA, Congress waived the federal government’s immunity from suit in tort, subject to a statutory time limitation of two years. 28 U.S.C. § 2401 (b).

Meyer v. Havens

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 26, 2023

Therefore, he is immune from Section 1983 liability and Plaintiffs’ second claim fails as a matter of law. D. … Cir. 2003) (officers who took part in execution of search warrant were entitled to qualified immunity because they did not draft the warrant and relied on local procedures); Giacalone v. Ne. Pa. Ins.

Hook v. Pike County

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 28, 2024

As to the potential application of qualified immunity, although the Court acknowledges its duty to “resolv[e] immunity questions at the earliest possible stage in litigation,” Pearson v. … [njor will Defendant{s] [...] be forced to undergo a trial or waste extensive time and resources when []he ultimately may be 26 entitled to qualified immunity.” /d.