Case law

Hopersberger v. Acting Commissioner of Social Security

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

In such instances, the defendant is plainly prejudiced by the plaintiff’s continuing inaction and dismissal of the case clearly rests in the discretion of the trial judge. Tillio, 256 F. … With respect to equitable tolling claims made in this setting, it is also clear that: “plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that equitable tolling applies. Courtney v.

Fattah v. John Doe 1

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 18, 2019

The moving party bears the initial burden to identify “specific portions of the record that establish the absence of a genuine issue of material fact.” … The Defendant has not established that there is not genuine issue of material fact regarding the claims against Granlund and he certainly has not established that he is entitled to prevail on his motion

Pompey Coal Company v. Borough Of Jessup

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

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. … Due to the sheer size of Pompey Coal’s land holdings, the new zoning ordinance affected only two property owners,4 but it was clearly and expressly intended to increase the Borough’s residential housing

Oduro v. Saul

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 25, 2022

These regulations do (continued on next page) Under the Social Security Act and its implementing regulations, an unmarried individual does not qualify for … Here, although the details are not clearly set out by the record, the plaintiff’s prior award of SSI benefits was clearly suspended, and then terminated by operation of law, due to excess resources several years

In Re Chocolate Confectionary Antitrust Litigation

641 F. Supp. 2d 367 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 11, 2009

Alternatively, they contend that Mars Canada’s in-forum purchases, executive travel, and sales of goods qualify as *386 systematic and continuous contacts with the United States. a. … This passive flow of funds from in-forum entities to Nestlé S.A. does not form the cynosure of Nestlé S.A.’s business and is clearly insufficient to confer general jurisdiction.

Ealy v. Bechtold

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 8, 2021

or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities … With respect to the third factor, Defendants have clearly articulated the impact accommodation of Ealy’s many requests, beyond the accommodations already in place, would have on FCJ’s guards, other inmates, and on the

Bohannon v. Trevethan

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 23, 2024

any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities … Bohannon’s due process claim arising from confiscation and/or interference with his mail also does not constitute a significant or atypical hardship, and, as such, does not qualify for any procedural protections.

Toth Jr. v. Chapman

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

When standing is challenged at the pleading stage, “the plaintiff must ‘clearly . . . allege facts demonstrating’ each element.” Id. (quoting Warth v. … To qualify as “imminent,” a “threatened injury must be certainly impending,” whereas “[a]llegations of possible future injury” are insufficient. Clapper, 568 U.S. at 409 (quoting Whitmore v.

Allen v. Eckard

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 14, 2019

Additionally, de minimis use of physical force does not qualify as excessive force unless the force is “repugnant to the conscience of mankind.” … Nor can an inmate avoid this exhaustion requirement by merely alleging that the administrative policies were not clearly explained to him. Warman, 49 F. App’x at 368.

Wayne Land and Mineral Group, LLC v. Delaware River Basin Commission

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 3, 2025

2009 and 2010 Executive Director Determinations establishing § 3.8 project review. … The DRBC asserts that the purpose of the exception is “to deter a ‘manipulative litigant [from] immunizing itself from suit indefinitely, altering its behavior long enough to secure a dismissal and then reinstating it

LaSpina v. SEIU Pennsylvania State Council

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 11, 2019

She must allege: 1) that the alleged misconduct was committed by a person acting under color of state law; and 2) that as a result, she was deprived of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution … As discussed, plaintiff’s allegations do not establish a common law agency between Local 668 and State Council.

Beck

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 21, 2026

During this investigation, Rose viewed the video of the incident, which Beck alleges “clearly shows . . . … the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities

Warrington v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections

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

To establish a section 1983 claim, a plaintiff must establish that a defendant, acting under color of state law, deprived the plaintiff of a right secured by the United States Constitution. Mark v. … His condition was clearly urgent in nature as his injuries required him to be transported to the hospital immediately after the attack. (Doc. 35-1, at 28-29).

Zeiders v. Saul

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 9, 2021

Listing 12.05C does not speak to sufficient, severe, or serious limitations in adaptive functioning—it does not qualify these limitations. See 20 C.F.R. … Accordingly, it appears to us that the ALJ applied the differing versions of 12.05 to Zeiders’ claim, or at least so muddled her analysis that we cannot clearly determine which she applied.

Rivas v. CBK Lodge General Partner, LLC

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 27, 2021

There is no further qualifying language, only mention of the necessity to acquire a mediator who is privy to information regarding the construction industry. (Doc. 69- 3, at 9). … If the intent between the parties was to limit the requirement of mediation to work-related issues, then such qualifying language could have been included.

Allen v. Lackawanna County Board of Commissioners

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 23, 2019

based on functional demotion; 3) FMLA retaliation and discrimination claims; 4) state law fraud and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims; 5) claims brought under “29 CFR Labor 1630-1630.9", and 6) official immunity … A transfer involving no reduction in pay and no more than a minor change in working conditions does not qualify as materially adverse. /d.; see also Hair v. Fayette Cty.

Omnipoint Communications, Inc. v. City of Scranton

36 F. Supp. 2d 222 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 26, 1999

Because personal wireless services providers are not “public utilities,” they do not qualify for exemptions from local zoning regulations. Id. … This relationship did not qualify Bell Atlantic Mobile for exemption from local zoning requirements.

Summy-Long v. Pennsylvania State University

226 F. Supp. 3d 371 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 27, 2016

Even then, as the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit once commented in a similar action, “statistics, though striking upon first reading, may simply reflect an absence of qualified female applicants, rather … Nor, apart from the direct framework for establishing retaliation, did Packer offer any suggestion as to how she might establish retaliation indirectly.

Pennsylvania State Employees Credit Union v. Fifth Third Bank

398 F. Supp. 2d 317 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 18, 2005

Such an outstanding burden is clearly inappropriate and a danger to our economic system.” … PSECU relies on the second test to establish its status.

Walkowicz Shea v. Kalahari Resorts & Conventions - Poconos

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

A: Yes, very clearly. … “Where a property owner is charged with negligence in permitting the accumulation of snow or ice on his sidewalk, the proof necessary to sustain such charge has been clearly defined by our decisional law.