Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
2,574 results
0.38s
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 27, 2023
However, “[t]he Third Circuit has made it clear that district courts may only consider certain kinds of extrinsic evidence to establish latent ambiguity in a contract: ‘A party may use extrinsic evidence to support its … judicial administration dictates that the court withhold judgment until the whole factual structure stands upon a solid foundation of a plenary trial where the proof can be fully developed, questions answered, issues clearly
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 25, 2020
Defendant Grego denied Davis’s grievance on March 7, 2017, and stated that the DOC maintains a “clearly outlined policy” regarding the treatment of prisoners with Hepatitis C. (Doc. 112, at 8, 19). … To establish a ‘policy,’ a plaintiff must show that “a decisionmaker possess[ing] final authority to establish municipal policy with respect to the action issues a final proclamation, policy or edict.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 20, 2026
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 … Korede’s TRO Motion Korede moves for a temporary restraining order requiring Defendants to, inter alia, “provide immediate cardiac evaluation by a qualified specialist” and transfer him to “an appropriate medical
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 27, 2019
in part, to protect the interest of a group of individuals, as opposed to the public generally; (2) The statute or regulation must clearly … Pike Coal Co., 412 A.2d 466, 472 (Pa. 1979) (“Proof of malice, i.e., an intent to injure, is essential in proof of a conspiracy.”). 163 Defendants’ alleged acts of planning and participating in the party also qualify
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 26, 2019
The primary requirement for filing a document under seal is a showing of “good cause” which is established on a showing that disclosure will work a clearly defined and serious injury to the party seeking closure. … If both prongs are satisfied, a qualified First Amendment right of public access attaches. Id.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 17, 2025
The “clearly established Federal law’ governing sufficiency of the evidence claims is set forth in the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979). … On the whole, it is clear that the Superior Court’s prejudice analysis reflected a reasonable application of “clearly established” federal law. See Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86, 101 (2011); Jacobs v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 25, 2021
Furthermore, an inmate cannot avoid this exhaustion requirement by merely alleging that the administrative policies were not clearly explained to him. Warman, 49 F. App’x at 368. … claim, a plaintiff must plead two essential elements: (1) that the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under color of law, and (2) that said conduct deprived the plaintiff of a right, privilege, or immunity
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 27, 2020
As the nature of the surgeries was to address conditions noted to be severe by the ALJ, the records clearly may have been relevant, particularly if there were complications following the … The burden is on the claimant to show that an impairment qualifies as severe. Bowen, 482 U.S. at 146.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 27, 2025
She was clearly very upset and angered by his visit. Managers across the board knew of his reason for transfer, and like usual nothing was addressed or changed. Another good worker gone! … Defendant Sheetz does not dispute that Plaintiff has established the first three prongs of the prima facie case, nor could it: Tingley was over the age of 40, was subject to an adverse employment action, and was qualified
Cited 0 timesUnknown711 F. Supp. 2d 340 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · May 3, 2010
To make a conspiracy claim under section 1983 a plaintiff must additionally establish the elements of a civil conspiracy. Ammlung v. … Negligence can be established by a failure to conduct an investigation. Rue v.
Cited 10 timesPublished934 F. Supp. 2d 759 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 25, 2013
In Thomas, the Court stated: It is well-established that district courts retain jurisdiction to consider an alien’s habeas challenge to the statutory framework mandating his detention during removal proceedings. … If it is unambiguous, then Congress’s clearly expressed intent is binding upon this Court and the BIA. Id. at 842-43 , 104 S.Ct. 2778 .
Cited 1 timesPublishedDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 21, 2022
The standard for cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment, established by the Supreme Court in Estelle v. … Here, the Court finds that the allegations in the amended complaint clearly demonstrate that McKinley had received medical attention for his neck lump, severe abdominal pain, bad chemical taste in
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 31, 2026
consent with the court.20 It is this latter requirement of voluntary entry that clearly distinguishes the FLSA conditional certification process from the traditional class certification framework of Federal Rule of Civil … Court believes that even if the two examples would appear to be a juxtaposition when placed next to each other, based on the entirety of the conditional certification standard, it makes sense that job title would also qualify
Cited 0 timesUnknownMiddletown Water Joint Venture LLC v. Borough of Middletown
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 13, 2020
While performing under the Agreement, the parties disagreed about whether certain capital improvements—specifically, “Water Main Replacement Work”—qualified as Major Capital Improvements for which Capital Cost Recovery … To succeed on a Rule 12(c) motion, the movant must clearly establish that no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and that the movant “is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Sikirica v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownGair v. Great Star Tools USA, Inc.
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 14, 2023
Gair estimates that the total number of former Shop- Vac employees who were fired and would qualify under the proposed class definition exceed 400—an estimate that Great Star does not contest.30 In her reply … individual class members.”59 However, common questions clearly predominate over those individual questions, and the first prong of Rule 23(b)(3) is satisfied. 2.
Cited 0 timesUnknownHunter v. Lehigh Valley Mount Pocono Hospital
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 12, 2022
“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 United States … As the amended complaints in their current form do not clearly set forth any claims against Medical Defendants or Police Officer Defendants, dismissal is warranted.
Cited 0 timesUnknownKoala Insulation Franchisor, LLC v. Lotus & The Rooster Holdings Company
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 10, 2025
This circular logic does not establish a franchisee 8 Koala comes very close to, if not over the line, of having abandoned this line of argument for failing to clearly identify the legitimate business interests in … However, “the determination of whether an activity qualifies as a protected legitimate business interest under the statute is inherently a factual inquiry, which is heavily industry- and context-specific.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 5, 2022
To establish an entitlement to disability insurance benefits under Title II, the claimant must establish that he or she suffered from a disability on or before the date on which they are last insured. A. … Specifically, Ksiazkiewicz argues that the ALJ erred (1) in considering his limitations in determining his 3 In his brief, Ksiazkiewicz fails to present a statement of the case and a clearly set forth statement of
Cited 0 timesUnknownChabot v. Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc.
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 26, 2021
Here, most of the information sought by Plaintiffs is clearly relevant. Plaintiffs request documents which concern the FTC review of the proposed transactions giving rise to this lawsuit. (Doc. 167-1, at 12-13). … Plaintiffs assert that Weil has not established the potential burden with sufficient specificity. (Doc. 166, at 44).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 5, 2024
{fj 47-48) 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 secured by the Constitution | and laws, … To establish such a claim of malicious prosecution, the plaintiff must establish the following elements: | (1) the defendants initiated a criminal proceeding; | (2) the criminal proceeding ended in plaintiffs
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna