Case law

Alford v. Baylor

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 10, 2023

actions caused the alleged constitutional deprivation.45 To the extent that Defendants assert that summary judgment should be granted “for the defendants,”46 or that they are entitled to qualified … immunity, they are free to properly assert such arguments through their own Rule 56 motion that complies with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of Court.47 As it stands, Defendants are not the

Doxzon v. Department of Human Services of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 15, 2020

“Though clearly relevant, budgetary constraints alone are insufficient to establish a fundamental alteration defense.” Id. … Fla. 2010) (“Plaintiff clearly established that she is at risk of irreparable injury if required to enter a nursing home.”).

Bohinski

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 7, 2026

“A federal habeas court may not issue the writ simply because that court concludes in its independent judgment that the relevant state-court decision applied clearly established federal law erroneously … offer such testimony, if such person(s) would have been available and willing to offer character testimony at trial, or if any such alleged evidence would have qualified

Jenkins

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 16, 2025

There is no genuine dispute that RCH does not qualify as an employer under Title VII’s threshold element. … It is up to the Plaintiff to directly and clearly provide the Court with record evidence that contradicts Defendants’ asserted undisputed facts.

Lawman v. Herbert, Rowland & Grubic, Ino.

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 8, 2020

To establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination, the employee must establish that she (1) has a disability; (2) is a qualified individual; and (3) suffered an adverse employment action because of her disability … Here, Lawman clearly requested an accommodation for leave.

George v. Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 31, 2021

In January 2016, George sat on a hiring panel that interviewed and recommended qualified candidates for employment with PTC. … Comm'n, 54 F.3d 1140, 1142–43 (3d Cir. 1995) (affirming district court’s finding that PTC is not an arm of the state for purposes of Eleventh Amendment immunity).

McAndrew v. Northumberland County

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 17, 2024

sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’”3 The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has instructed that “[u]nder the pleading regime established … Although Hoskin’s arguments concerning his lack of personal involvement in the constitutional violation and his entitlement to qualified immunity are not overly persuasive, he will nevertheless be dismissed with prejudice

Dombrowski v. GOULD ELECTRONICS, INC.

31 F. Supp. 2d 436 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 20, 1998

Testimony by Experts If scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience … The court in Redland also found that its interpretation of these terms is consistent with the General Assembly’s clearly stated intent “to provide new remedies to protect the citizens of this Commonwealth against the release

Thompson Ex Rel. Thompson v. Waynesboro Area School District

673 F. Supp. 1379 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 24, 1987

The Supreme Court has clearly held that the right of free speech includes the right to distribute literature. Martin v. Struthers, 319 U.S. 141 , 63 S.Ct. 862 , 87 L.Ed. 1313 (1943). … The court also qualified its finding that the school had created a limited public forum with the recognition of the special order and discipline needs that a high school has.

Kimmel v. Doughty

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 22, 2023

It is also well established that “[a] defendant in a civil rights action must have personal involvement in the alleged wrongs to be liable, and cannot be held responsible for a constitutional violation which he or she … Plaintiff will be granted leave to file an amended complaint, but he must clearly label the document as his amended complaint and use the docket number assigned to this case.

McKnight v. Kingsboro

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 18, 2025

The Court found that such allegations did not implicate any clearly established rights and concluded that McKnight relied on her own legal conclusions that these actions violated her rights. … Thus, the undersigned dismissed the claims against Defendants on the grounds of qualified immunity. See Kelly v. Police Officer Barry Szamboti Warwick Twp.

French v. County of Luzerne

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 4, 2023

To state a cause of action under §1983, a plaintiff must allege that: (1) the conduct complained of was committed by persons acting under color of state law; and (2) the conduct violated a right, privilege, or immunity … “Undeniably the Constitution of the United States protects the right of all qualified citizens to vote, in state as well as in federal elections and to have their votes counted.” Reynolds v.

Campion v. Northeast Utilities

598 F. Supp. 2d 638 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 24, 2009

However, this is “‘a closely circumscribed and narrow exception to the general rule,’ ” and applies “only ‘when a rule from elsewhere in federal law clearly provides a closer analogy than available state statutes, and when … “In Darden , the Supreme Court articulated the test for deciding if a party qualifies as an employee.” Watson, 87 Fed.Appx. at 261 .

Khouzam v. Hogan

529 F. Supp. 2d 543 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 10, 2008

Indeed, this ambiguous statement clearly contemplates that CAT claims would be subject to judicial review as part of the removal procedures. … “The Court’s repeated statements that decisions by the political branches in the immigration area are largely immune from judicial control,’ or are ‘subject only to narrow judicial review,’ clearly do not altogether preclude

TIG Insurance v. Tyco International Ltd.

919 F. Supp. 2d 439 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 23, 2013

It is undisputed that Section I.C.l of the TIG Policy 8 clearly establishes that TIG has no duty to defend Grinnell. (Doc. 125 at 20; Doc. 161 at 20.) … Here, TIG does not dispute that Grinnell is a “named insured” or that the Fire qualifies as an “occurrence” under the TIG Policy. (Doc. 118, Ex. 35 at 2.)

Jane Doe v. Loyalsock Township School District

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 28, 2026

Atkins to address the rebuttal — assuming he is qualified to do so. 60 In re TMI Litig., 193 F.3d 613, 663 (3d Cir. 1999). … alone, the Court has sufficient justification to deny the District’s motion in limine.101 However, it is also important to note that “[e]vidence should only be excluded on a motion in limine if it is clearly

Valdez v. Kauffman

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 15, 2021

Finally, a third alternative form of relief is available to Valdez via Governor Wolf’s temporary program to reprieve sentences of incarceration for those inmates who meet established criteria. … Whether Valdez would qualify for such a reprieve is unknown.

Shelton v. Gure

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 1, 2021

The logbook and test-driving results are clearly relevant to Plaintiff’s claims because these documents could show whether Defendants were or were not justified in hiring and entrusting their vehicle to Gure, as well as … Lacey is permitted to conclude that YaYa failed to qualify Gure as required by FMCSR 391, however it would be speculative and would invite unfair prejudice for Lacey to state that Gure was generally not a qualified driver

Anderson v. Kaufman

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 15, 2021

Finally, a third alternative form of relief is available to Anderson via Governor Wolf’s temporary program to reprieve sentences of incarceration for those inmates who meet established criteria. … Whether Anderson would qualify for such a reprieve is unknown.

Bobrick Corporation v. Santana Products, Inc.

698 F. Supp. 2d 479 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 22, 2010

Whether Noerr/Pennington immunity applied to Lanham Act § 43(a) claims was an issue of first impression. … In this case, the Pennsylvania courts have clearly rejected the Dragonetti and abuse of process claims arising out of the identical factual scenario presented here.