Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filterspamd

4,649 results

0.68s

  • Goff v. Cummins, Inc.

    District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 31, 2023

    Co. v. Evans, 166 F.3d 139, 148 (3d Cir. 1999); Andrews v. City of Philadelphia, 895 F.2d 1469, 1485 (3d Cir. 1990))); see, e.g., Brown-Baumbach v. B&B Auto., Inc., 437 F. … See Brown-Baumbach, 437 F. App’x at 134 (citing Durham, 166 F.3d at 148). IV.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • United States v. Collins

    395 F. Supp. 629 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 25, 1975

    Id.; United States v. … United States v. Amaral, 488 F.2d 1148 (9th Cir. 1973); United States v. Brown, 501 F.2d 146 (9th Cir. 1974). Therefore, considering all the circumstances of this case, I conclude that the probative value of Dr.

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • Deonna v. Centre Hills Country Club

    District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 30, 2022

    (citing Ryan v. Carter, 93 U.S. 78 (1876); United States v. … (citing Hoy v.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Snyder v. Saul

    District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 27, 2022

    When objections are timely filed to the report and recommendation of a magistrate judge, the district court must review de novo those portions of the report to which objections are made. 28 U.S.C. '636(b)(1); Brown v. … Rieder v. Apfel, 115 F.Supp.2d 496, 499 (M.D.Pa. 2000) (citing United States v. Raddatz, 447 U.S. 667, 676 (1980)).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Ward, Jr. v. Warden of SCI-Houtzdale

    District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 30, 2021

    Brown v. Shannon, 322 F.3d 768, 773 (3d Cir. 2003) (quoting Valverde v. Stinson, 224 F.3d 129, 134 (2d Cir. 2000)). … Ross v. Varano, 712 F.3d 784, 799-800 (3d Cir. 2013) (citing Brown v. Shannon, 322 F.3d 768, 774 (3d Cir. 2003)).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • McFarland v. Berryhill

    District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 3, 2020

    Burnett v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 220 F.3d 112, 119-20 (3d Cir. 2000). … Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389, 401 (1971). It is more than a mere scintilla of evidence but may be less than a preponderance. Brown v.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Dame v. Monahan

    758 F. Supp. 1042 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 14, 1991

    Vendo Co. v. … See, e.g., Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States, supra; Ingersoll-Rand Fin. Corp. v. Callison, supra; Sea Colony, Inc. v. Alcan Aluminum Corp., 653 F.Supp. 1323 (D.Del.1987); CBS, Inc. v.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • United States v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

    220 F. Supp. 144 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 30, 1963

    Ex parte Crow Dog, 109 U.S. 556 , 3 S.Ct. 396 , 27 L.Ed. 1030 (1883); Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Bilder, 3 Cir., 289 F.2d 291, 303 (1961); Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. … In Rodgers v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Nottingham v. Harry

    District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 19, 2020

    v. … P. 72(b), advisory committee notes; see also Univac Dental Co. v. Dentsply Intern., Inc., 702 F. Supp. 2d 465, 469 (M.D.Pa. 2010) (citing Henderson v.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • United States v. Crespo

    868 F. Supp. 79 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 20, 1994

    Horton v. … Andreas, 463 U.S. 765 , 103 S.Ct. 3319 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1003 (1983); Texas v. Brown, 460 U.S. 730 , 103 S.Ct. 1535 , 75 L.Ed.2d 502 (1983).

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Baker v. Benton Area School District

    District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 29, 2019

    Comm’rs of Bryan Cty., Okl. v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397, 405 (1997). … Brown, “require[s] proof that a municipal actor disregarded a known or obvious consequence of his action.” Id. at 410.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Ramirez-Montoya

    District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 22, 2025

    Ramirez-Montoya appealed the denial of his application to the Board of Immigration Appeals (the “Board”). … V.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Zimmerman v. Corbett

    195 F. Supp. 3d 695 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 15, 2016

    Kenneth Brown, II, Michael A Sprow, Anthony J. Fiore, and Gary E. Speaks maliciously prosecuted him in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. (Doc. No. 1.) … In Kelly v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Muldoon

    District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 2, 2026

    The Board has the authority to appoint a person or committee to administer the Plans. (Doc. 1, ¶¶ 36-39). The Board tasked the Committee with administering the Plans. (Doc. 1, ¶¶ 39-42). … See Mator v.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Brizuela v. DeRiso

    District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 12, 2022

    Brizuela v. Federation of State Medical Boards, 1:22-cv-1249-WIA; 2. Brizuela v. Sarah Wagner, 1:22-cv-1250-WIA; 3. Brizuela v. … In case 1:22-cv-1249-WIA, he alleges that The Federation of State Medical Boards, based in Texas, violated of his constitutional rights.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Brizuela v. WVU Medical Center

    District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 12, 2022

    Brizuela v. Federation of State Medical Boards, 1:22-cv-1249-WIA; 2. Brizuela v. Sarah Wagner, 1:22-cv-1250-WIA; 3. Brizuela v. … In case 1:22-cv-1249-WIA, he alleges that The Federation of State Medical Boards, based in Texas, violated of his constitutional rights.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • United States v. Conn

    907 F. Supp. 832 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 30, 1995

    In United States v. … United States v. Brown, 3 F.3d 673, 680 (3rd Cir.1993). The government characterizes the evidence presented against Defendant Conn as follows.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Moffitt v. Tunkhannock Area School District

    District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 30, 2020

    Moffitt filed the instant case on May 28, 2019, again challenging his termination and naming as defendants TASD, the TASD Board of School Directors (“the Board”), and the individual members of the Board, who were … Loudermill v. Cleveland Bd.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Bennett v. Shoemaker

    District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 23, 2023

    Furthermore, the only relevant member of the “Prison Board” for the instant motion to dismiss is Lusk. … No. 29 at 16-21), but that contract is executed by the County Commissioners, not the Prison Board.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Morrison v. Stepanski

    839 F. Supp. 1130 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 3, 1993

    California v. … See, e.g., Webb v. Keohane, 804 F.2d 413, 414-15 (7th Cir.1986); Brown v. Wolff, 706 F.2d 902, 907 (9th Cir.1983); People v. McClendon, 224 Cal.App.3d 1208 , 274 Cal.Rptr. 502 , 506 (1990); and Drescher v.

    Cited 9 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.