Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
2,574 results
1.28s
Rivera v. Superintendent of SCI-Forest
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 7, 2023
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel The clearly established ineffective assistance of counsel standard as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States is as follows: Ineffective … For AEDPA purposes, the Strickland test qualifies as “clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court.” Williams, 529 U.S. at 391, 120 S.Ct. 1495.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 21, 2020
Harris, the United States Supreme Court “established a principle of abstention when federal adjudication would disrupt an ongoing state criminal proceeding.” Yang v. … When seeking to impose liability due to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, the appropriate remedy is a civil rights action. See Leamer, 288 F.3d at 540.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 29, 2024
The parties do not dispute that Aaron LeVan was qualified for the position. (Doc. 21, p. 6, ¶ 22); (Doc. 25, ¶ 22). Plaintiff contends, however, that he was more qualified than Aaron LeVan. … “Section 1983 imposes civil liability upon any person who, acting under the color of state law, deprives another individual of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 7, 2023
Judge Jones concluded that Defendants had sovereign immunity to intentional tort actions by virtue of the Pennsylvania Sovereign Immunity Act. See Doc. 15 at 23-24. … Public School Employees Retirement System, the Lord court explained that “terms in an employee handbook are binding only when either the handbook itself or the employer’s representation of it clearly indicate
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 18, 2024
immunity provided” by the work product doctrine.38 “The party invoking 32 Martin v. … (“[D]efendant again supplies no proof to establish any element of work product protection . . .
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 30, 2026
And “[w]here, as here, a case is at the pleading stage, the plaintiff must ‘clearly . . . allege facts demonstrating’ each element.” Id. (footnote omitted) (quoting Warth v. … 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.
Cited 0 timesUnknown992 F. Supp. 2d 410 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · May 20, 2014
Indicia of Suspectness 11 The Supreme Court has established certain criteria for evaluating *427 whether a class qualifies as suspect or quasi-suspect, which query whether the group: (1) has been subjected to “a history of … In our case, “[t]he question is not whether homosexuals have achieved political successes over the years; they clearly have.
Cited 37 timesPublishedDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 8, 2025
These claims are also flawed, however, as some of the defendants are not alleged to be state actors as required for § 1983 claims; some of the defendants would be entitled to immunity; and claims against the County or … Borough would require allegations missing from the amended complaint (specifically, allegations to establish Monell liability).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 29, 2024
If determined to have three qualifying strikes to their name, then the court must consider whether the prisoner qualifies for the “imminent danger” exception. … “To the contrary, a court may discredit ‘factual claims of imminent danger that are ‘clearly baseless’.” Id. (quoting Gibbs v. Cross, 160 F.3d 962, 967 (3d Cir. 1998)).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 9, 2024
Chorba’s alleged conduct shocks the conscience and Plaintiff’s right to be free from sexual abuse at the hands of her teachers has been clearly established as fundamental. See Kobrick v. … Dist., 882 F.2d 720, 727 (3d Cir. 1989) (“Nearly three decades ago, the Third Circuit affirmed that a student’s right to be free from sexual abuse at the hands of her teacher is clearly established.”)
Cited 0 timesUnknownPompey Coal Company v. Borough Of Jessup
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 31, 2021
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. … This is sufficient to establish a property interest entitled to due process protection.
Cited 0 timesUnknownEash v. County of York, Pennsylvania
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 30, 2022
immunity or whether a policy or custom exists to hold the County liable under Monell. … First, the plaintiff must establish a prima facie case of discrimination by showing that “(1) [he] is a member of a protected class; (2) [he] was qualified for the position in question; (3) [he] suffered an adverse employment
Cited 0 timesUnknownCitizen Developer, LLC v. System Soft Technologies, Inc.
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 30, 2026
SST used content marketing to establish CD as an expert in the low- code and no-code market. … SST must establish the reliability of Venkatesan’s testimony. VanDine, 738 F. Supp. 3d at 610.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 21, 2020
Harris, the United States Supreme Court “established a principle of abstention when federal adjudication would disrupt an ongoing state criminal proceeding.” Yang v. … When seeking to impose liability due to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, the appropriate remedy is a civil rights action. See Leamer, 288 F.3d at 540.
Cited 0 timesUnknownEqual Employment Opportunity Commission v. Federal Express Corp.
537 F. Supp. 2d 700 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 18, 2005
Intervenor Presented Sufficient Evidence to Establish Her IIED Claim Defendant contends that Intervenor failed to establish a claim for IIED be *713 cause (1) Intervenor failed to demonstrate that Defendant’s conduct was … The Court noted that: the PHRA, with its similar language and applicability, clearly provides a cause of action nearly identical to that of the ADA.
Cited 12 timesPublished639 F. Supp. 802 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 12, 1986
Additionally, each of the overt acts was established by competent evidence. … In the court’s view, the verdict clearly was not against the weight of the evidence and the motion will be denied.
Cited 4 timesPublished686 F. Supp. 2d 499 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 17, 2009
Mayor of Balt., 32 U.S. (7 Pet.) 243 , 8 L.Ed. 672 (1833)), and also foreclosed incorporating the Second *518 Amendment against the States via the Fourteenth Amendment’s Privileges and Immunities Clause, id. … Likewise, Kraft’s subjective understanding that he had been seized is clearly insufficient: the test for a seizure is an objective one.
Cited 5 timesPublishedDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 29, 2021
Petitioner’s argument, however, clearly lacks merit. … Even assuming that this group is a qualified EBRR or PA, Petitioner would not be entitled to ETCs for its completion because he completed it before January 15, 2020.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 21, 2024
“Under the pleading regime established by Twombly and Iqbal, a court reviewing the sufficiency of a complaint must take three steps. … In the instant case, the allegations in Plaintiffs amended complaint clearly demonstrate that Plaintiff received ongoing medical attention, along with a variety of treatments,’ and that Plaintiff merely
Cited 0 timesUnknownRich v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 22, 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. … tight, 2 Although Rich did not provide an address for Parcel, and Parcel is not presently listed on the docket because he was not listed in the “Defendants” section of the complaint form, Rich clearly
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna