Case law

Timko v. City of Hazleton

665 F. Supp. 1130 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 12, 1986

Although the issue need not be discussed in detail in light of the court’s disposition of the matter, it appears that Defendant Conway may be entitled to immunity from damages in this case. In Malley v. … A growing number of courts including the Supreme Court ... have wrestled with this is.sue in analogous situations, answering the question whether there has been constitutional violation with, for the most part, a qualified

Lee-Chima v. Hughes

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 11, 2022

His allegations of being beaten while restrained and without a penological purpose clearly satisfy the pleading requirements for stating an excessive force claim. … Commonwealth parties acting within the scope of their employment generally are immune from suit except when immunity is explicitly waived. See 1 PA. CONS. STAT. §2310; 42 PA. CONS.

Keystone Printed Specialties Co. v. Scranton Printing Pressmen & Assistants Union No. 119

386 F. Supp. 416 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 9, 1974

[Para. 4, p. 12] “The parties further agree that qualified employees with lesser seniority shall be allowed to fill all vacancies if they are available to return to work sooner than employees having greater seniority. … “Arbitration was established as an instrument to expedite the formal requirements of trial.

DeMolick v. United States

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 24, 2022

Here, the Government attacks the factual sufficiency of the complaint in establishing jurisdiction. (Doc. No. 9 at 4-5.) … In enacting the FTCA, Congress waived the federal government’s immunity from tort suits brought by private parties. See 28 U.S.C. § 2674.

Allen v. Wells

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 7, 2023

and clearly against the law”); Tarapchak v. … “Ultimately, whether a prosecutor is entitled to absolute immunity depends on whether she establishes that she was functioning as the state's ‘advocate’ while engaging in the alleged conduct that gives

Snider

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 18, 2018

To establish a claim under § 1983, the plaintiff must establish a deprivation of a federally protected right and that this deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law. Woloszyn v. … immunity.

Mitchell v. Department of Corrections

272 F. Supp. 2d 464 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 22, 2003

But in Spencer , Justice Souter very clearly says “I join the Court’s opinion as well as the judgment, though I do so for an added reason the Court does not reach, but which I spoke to while concurring in a prior case.” … Second, we can say with certainty that from his arrest on February 9, 1993, forward, the record clearly shows Plaintiff had received sentences under which he would have been lawfully incarcerated until February 9, 2003 —

TSHUDY v. PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 16, 2023

The first argument—and her entire claim—fails because an Exhibit Tshudy attached to her Amended Complaint clearly indicates that Penn State and Tshudy had previously agreed that she would take her Fall 2021 examinations … solution via the “interactive process” mandated by the ADA.13 These requests were denied and Penn State claimed that further accommodation would place an undue burden on the University.14 After this, Tshudy “overexposed her immune

Klaiber

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 9, 2026

Personal Involvement It is well established that, in Section 1983 actions, liability cannot be “predicated solely on the operation of respondeat superior.”28 Rather, a Section … Initially, the Court notes that this is the only conduct alleged by Klaiber that could have caused his serious medical harm, so he clearly has failed to state an Eighth Amendment medical indifference claim against the

Knoblauch v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., Inc.

315 F. Supp. 2d 636 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 27, 2004

PROCEDURAL HISTORY The documents submitted by the parties establish that Mr. … This language clearly gives the plan administrator discretion over the payment of benefits, and as such, the arbitrary and capricious standard applies in this case.

Brazil v. Scranton School Board

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 3, 2024

acting within the scope of their duties, shall continue to enjoy sovereign immunity and official immunity and remain immune from suit except as the General Assembly shall specifically waive the immunity.” 1 Pa. … “Under Pennsylvania law, even unauthorized acts may be within the scope of employment ‘if they are clearly incidental to the master’s business.’” Brumfield v.

Slavcoff v. Harrisburg Polyclinic Hospital

375 F. Supp. 999 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 25, 1974

Those cases are clearly distinguishable from the one at bar. … They shall be legally, professionally and ethically qualified for the positions to which they are appointed.”

Kramer v. Berryhill

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

Ct. at 2053 (“Freytag says everything necessary to decide this case.”), it had a limited reach because it only established that “special trial judges” (STJs) of the United States Tax Court qualify as … Pa. 2020), the court awarded EAJA fees after concluding the Commissioner's position contradicted clearly established law as set out in Sims v. Apfel, 530 U.S. 103 (2000).

Doe v. Schuylkill County Courthouse

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 7, 2024

Further, we note that Halcovage also asserts the defense of qualified immunity with respect to his vote on the restructure of the tax claim offices. … First Amendment claim, we decline to address Halcovage’s argument concerning qualified immunity.

Miles v. U. S. Department of Labor

546 F. Supp. 437 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 31, 1982

The quality of a particular agency decision will clearly be affected by the communications received by the decisionmaker on the subject of the decision prior to the time the decision is made.” … Under these circumstances, we conclude that adequate “express assurances of confidentiality” were given and, thus, the persons contacted by the OSHA investigators qualify as “confidential sources” under section 7(D).

Hershey Creamery Co. v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co.

386 F. Supp. 3d 447 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · May 6, 2019

We need not determine the meaning of "published in the print ... media" or decide whether in-store advertising signage qualifies as an advertisement under that meaning. … The problem for Hershey is that it has not yet established the third element-damages.

Trethaway v. Pizano

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

After consideration, we agree that Trethaway cannot establish liability against the Township. … He contends that these positions were offered to less qualified officers who were not involved in the Association, and that he and other officers involved in the Union and Association were deliberately excluded

McAndrew v. Northumberland County

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 21, 2023

McAndrew failed to plead the claim with sufficient factual specificity, and that certain Defendants are protected by the qualified immunity doctrine.34 1. … to qualified immunity.62 Because the Court has already dismissed the claims against these Defendants on other grounds, it declines to address this argument.

Halchak v. Dorrance Township Board of Supervisors

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 16, 2022

Code § 403.42a). 21 The Court notes that although Dorrance Defendants asserted an affirmative defense of qualified immunity in their Answer, (Doc. 44 at 10), none of the Defendants has raised or briefed said defense at … Because of this, and because the Court holds that Plaintiffs have failed to establish any constitutional deprivations as a matter of law, the Court does not reach the question of qualified immunity.

Trethaway v. Pizano

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

After consideration, we agree that Trethaway cannot establish liability against the Borough. … He contends that these positions were offered to less qualified officers who were not involved in the Association, and that he and other officers involved in the Union and Association were deliberately excluded