Case law

Pennsylvania v. Navient Corp.

354 F. Supp. 3d 529 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 17, 2018

"These packages consisted of a variety of loan products including: FFELP loans; private loans for borrowers who qualified for [Navient's] standard private student loan products (prime loans); and private loans for borrowers … Borrowers enrolled in IDR plans can also obtain loan forgiveness if they enroll in the plans and make qualifying payments for 20-25 years "for most IDR plans or 10 years of qualifying payments while working full time for

Bird v. Borough of Moosic

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 28, 2020

To establish a § 1983 claim, a plaintiff must establish that the defendants, acting under color of state law, deprived the plaintiff of a right secured by the United States Constitution. Mark v. … The prospect of uninterrupted income during periods of disability well may attract qualified persons to these vocations.

Bashore v. Pocono Mountain Regional Police Commission

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 23, 2020

To establish a prima facie case of age discrimination, the plaintiff must generally show the following: 1) he is forty years old; 2) the defendant took an adverse employment action against her; 3) the plaintiff was qualified … Therefore, under well-established precedent, see, e.g., Anderson, 477 U.S. at 255, a jury must determine whether Plaintiff was qualified for his position.

Benner v. Oswald

444 F. Supp. 545 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 20, 1978

The duties of the President of the University have been established by the Board of Trustees by Standing Order of the Board, (Exhibit D3). (U) 31. … The group from which qualified voters were chosen was an identifiable group of persons from a certain geographical district who were otherwise qualified to vote in a general election.

Danner v. Cameron

955 F. Supp. 2d 410 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 1, 2013

Rather, “[t]he state court’s application of clearly established law must be objectively unreasonable” before a federal court may grant the writ. Andrade, 538 U.S. at 75 , 123 S.Ct. 1166 . … The two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel established in Strickland “qualifies as ‘clearly established Federal lav/ ” for purposes of AEDPA.

Hagerty v. Smith

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 10, 2021

following two essential elements: (1) that the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under color of state law; and (2) that the conduct complained of deprived the Plaintiff of rights, privileges or immunities … None of the moving defendants qualify as a public entity. Therefore, the ADA is inapplicable, and this claim will be dismissed. D.

Petrunich v. Sun Building Systems, Inc.

625 F. Supp. 2d 199 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 7, 2008

Pursuant to Rule 36(a)(3), the matters were deemed admitted and, therefore, conclusively established. (Id. at 6.) … Under this standard, the award of nominal damages qualifies Mr. Petrunich as a prevailing party under the ADEA. That Mr.

Vogl v. Homeland at Home

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 4, 2022

“but for” causation with respect to this claim, are clearly matters for a jury to decide since the record, as recounted in the report, shows that there are genuine factual disputes. … It also contends that even if grief reaction was considered a disability, Vogl cannot establish that she was a “qualified individual” under the ADA since her own doctor’s medical certifications indicated that she was not

Pub. Interest Legal Found. v. Boockvar

370 F. Supp. 3d 449 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 26, 2019

Defendants contend that the Foundation does not qualify as a person aggrieved because its interests are "directly at odds" with the Act's stated goals. (Doc. 12 at 15). … District courts applying Section 20510 have found notice sufficient when it (1) sets forth the reasons that a defendant purportedly failed to comply with the NVRA, and (2) clearly communicates that a person is asserting a

Moffitt v. Tunkhannock Area School District

160 F. Supp. 3d 786 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 3, 2016

pattern of antagonism coupled with timing to establish a causal link.” … Unlike the statute in Trust Co., here there is no clearly evidenced intent for Act 93 to serve as the District’s contractual obligations to the plaintiff.

United States v. Capital Blue Cross

796 F. Supp. 144 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 5, 1992

As noted earlier in this Memorandum, § 1729 does not apply to Medicare and Medicaid-subsidized treatment, i.e., “insurance program[s] described in section 1811 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. § 1395c) or established … Moreover, by the language and legislative history of the section, Congress clearly intended 38 U.S.C. § 1729 to apply to private insurers such as CBC and to Medigap policies such as the 65 Specials.

Cupp v. County of Lycoming

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

To establish a § 1983 claim, the plaintiff must establish that the defendant, acting under color of state law, deprived the plaintiff of a right secured by the United States Constitution. Mark v. … to immunity.

Sanchez v. Rivello

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 10, 2024

Furthermore, an inmate cannot avoid the exhaustion requirement by merely alleging that the administrative policies were not clearly explained to him. See Davis v. Warman, 49 F. … It is well-established that the “failure of a prison official to provide a favorable response to an inmate grievance is not a federal constitutional violation.” Flanagan v. Shively, 783 F. Supp. 922, 931-32 (M.D.

Hayes v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance

92 F. Supp. 3d 276 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 17, 2015

To show that a state law cause of action is preempted, the defendant must establish that the plaintiffs claims are based on a plan that qualifies as an “employee welfare benefit plan” under ERISA. Kanne v. … As noted, plaintiff clearly alleged in his complaint that he was a PBA member. (Doc. 1, ¶ 8). . The transcript from the June 18, 2014 oral argument was docketed on March 11, 2015, at the request of the court. (Doc. 43).

Swenson v. Vedder

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 24, 2023

Plaintiffs object to the report and recommendation to the extent that Judge Schwab recommends granting Judge Vedder’s motion to dismiss on the basis of Eleventh Amendment immunity. … Objecting Defendants contend that Swenson’s testimony established that he and Cindy were parties who had specific, legal roles regarding the estate of Ms.

Espenshade v. Pennsylvania State University

563 F. Supp. 1172 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · May 4, 1983

The record establishes that F or failing grades were considered by HMC as plaintiff’s official grades. … Capitol Campus for the one year fulltime teaching position for which he was qualified, (3) he was not selected despite his qualifications, and (4) the position was filled by an individual younger than plaintiff.

Miller v. Machoga

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 22, 2022

“To establish a claim under 42 U.S.C. … Additionally, de minimis use of physical force does not qualify as excessive force unless the force is “repugnant to the conscience of mankind.” Brooks v.

Yascavage v. Weinberger

379 F. Supp. 1297 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · May 15, 1974

In an action to be tried without a jury the court shall accept the master’s findings of fact unless clearly erroneous. . ." … regarding the benefits hoped to be gained by having an experienced magistrate assist the court in preliminary review of post conviction applications, and these comments seem equally applicable to Social Security cases: “A qualified

Young v. Parker

256 F. Supp. 1002 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 12, 1966

The letters that the wife wrote and the personal interviews she had with the Probation Officer clearly indicated the difficulty she was having with the petitioner. … He states that he is a qualified typist, that the rules and regulations denying him the personal use of typing materials and typewriter constitutes cruel and unusual punishment under the “8th Amendment”, that his civil and

Easley v. Rowe

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

To establish a Section 1983 claim, a plaintiff must establish that the defendants, acting under color of state law, deprived the plaintiff of a right secured by the United States Constitution. … In some cases, causation can be established “from the evidence gleaned from the record as a whole.” .