Case law

Abigail, P., through her Parent, Sarah F. v. Old Forge School District

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 14, 2023

Clearly the school district and not the parent paid for the student’s nurse. The parent’s credibility is seriously impaired by this testimony. … To prevail on Section 504 and ADA claims, Plaintiff must prove that: (1) the child was “disabled,” (2) the child was “otherwise qualified” to participate in school activities, (3) the school district received federal funding

Benczkowski v. Bohlin Cywinski Jackson

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 1, 2024

Because this is clearly a factual question, summary judgment is in fact rarely appropriate in this type of case. … With this, plaintiff establishes a prima facie case.

Shadel v. Kijakazi

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 26, 2024

However, to qualify for benefits by showing that an impairment, or combination of impairments, is equivalent to a listed impairment, a plaintiff bears the burden of presenting “medical findings equivalent in severity … On this score, however, it is also clearly established that the ALJ's treatment of this issue must go beyond a summary conclusion, since a bare conclusion “is beyond meaningful judicial review.”

Sincavage v. Berryhill

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · May 29, 2020

In addition, the ALJ found that the evidence failed to establish the presence of paragraph C criteria based on the plaintiff’s conservative mental health treatment and the fact that the evidence did not establish … However, to qualify for benefits by showing that an impairment, or combination of impairments, is equivalent to a listed impairment, Plaintiff bears the burden of presenting “medical findings equivalent in severity to

Denman v. Wetzel

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 28, 2025

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 … Plaintiff asserts that her amended complaint clearly explains how Defendant MHM’s failure to implement or apply Department of Corrections (“DOC”) policies regarding potentially self-destructive individuals is the policy

Higgins v. Bayada Home Health Care, Inc.

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 22, 2021

Plus, Inc., 527 F.3d 358, 362 (3d Cir. 2008). 3 This time period has expired and the members of the FLSA collective are established and final. … Therefore, the court finds that Bayada’s compensation structure fits within the FLSA’s salary basis test and qualifies for the professional employee exemption from overtime pay.

GRAHAM v. CONNORS

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 27, 2020

Plaintiff “did not qualify for dentures or a partial plate even after the extraction of two additional front teeth.” (Id. ¶ 117.) IV. … Contrary to Plaintiff’s suggestions, however, the record clearly establishes that Defendant Viator provided dental care to Plaintiff and that partial dentures were not medically indicated.

Ramsey v. Buchanan Auto Park, Inc.

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 7, 2022

Buchanan has failed to establish that the court committed instructional error, much less error warranting a new trial. … Both sides clearly assumed that if the jury were to award damages for past and future lost wages, the award would track the amount set forth in the stipulation.

Webb v. Columbia County

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 27, 2023

For purposes of Section 1983, a supervisor’s personal involvement may be shown by establishing either that they (1) “with deliberate indifference to the consequences, established and maintained a policy, practice … Here, the undisputed facts establish no involvement by any defendant in Webb’s alleged constitutional injuries, nor do they establish any injury at all.

Gorton v. Air & Liquid Systems Corp.

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 6, 2023

GENSPECS and MILSPECS were prepared by hundreds of Navy engineers highly qualified in specialty areas such as, among many other things, valves, pumps, steam turbines, gas turbines, reduction gears, ship propulsion, electrical … In Boyle, however, the Court explicitly rejected Feres as the basis for the defense, reasoning that the Feres doctrine is too broad because it would render contractors immune for injuries caused by any standard

DeChamplain

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 22, 2026

Thus, these reports clearly focused upon Dechamplain’s episodes of depression and anxiety as the root causes of his claimed disability. … Chiampi as a “highly qualified expert who had the opportunity to review the claimant’s records.” (Tr. 25).

Perfinski v. Saul

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 19, 2021

As the Court of Appeals has noted on this score: In Burnett, we held that an ALJ must clearly set forth the reasons for his decision. 220 F.3d at 119. … Thus, under these regulations, only certain medical professionals were qualified to give medical opinions.

Lucent v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · May 7, 2020

In the alternative, Plaintiff argues that: As a lay person, the ALJ is not qualified to interpret Plaintiff’s impairments related to her MS in functional terms. … Therefore, in order to establish an inability to work, the medical records must corroborate the claimant’s allegation of disability during this period.

Soliday v. Dudek

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 20, 2025

Hooper are highly qualified experts who had the opportunity to review [Soliday]’s records.” Id. … And “[i]t is well established that sporadic or transitory activity does not disprove disability.” Id. at 971–72; see also Fargnoli v.

Pelton v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 4, 2020

Bauer (1) establishes far greater limitations than the ALJ found; and (2) establishes the Plaintiff met his burden of proof to come forward with evidence demonstrating that he is “disabled” pursuant … The ALJ clearly considered whether Bauer’s medical opinion was consistent with or supported by the record.

LoDuca v. McGinley

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 5, 2024

Therefore, in order to qualify for a stay and abeyance, a petitioner should “satisf[y] the three requirements for a stay as laid out in Rhines: good cause, potentially meritorious claims, and a lack of intentionally dilatory … habeas and § 1983 actions differ, and the two types of actions raise different issues in terms of procedural requirements and substantive standards, it would not be appropriate to simply construe this pleading, which was clearly

Daniel Riley v. George Miller, et al.

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 8, 2025

Although Plaintiff’s claims address a wide variety of purported wrongdoing over several months at two different prisons, there is a clearly comprehensible theory linking all of these claims that permits joinder under Rule … Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that leave to amend would be futile with respect to Riley’s claims against the Medical Defendants because the allegations in the second amended complaint establish that the Medical

Mertz v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 15, 2023

However, to qualify for benefits by showing that an impairment, or combination of impairments, is equivalent to a listed impairment, a plaintiff bears the burden of presenting “medical findings equivalent in severity … On this score, however, it is also clearly established that the ALJ’s treatment of this issue must go beyond a summary conclusion, since a bare conclusion “is beyond meaningful judicial review.”

Potts v. Cleveland-Cliffs, Inc.

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 4, 2025

plaintiff shows: (1) he or she is a member of a protected class; (2) he or she is qualified for the position; (3) he or she suffered an adverse employment action; and (4) either the adverse employment action occurred under … Innovative Sys., Inc., 191 F.3d 344, 356 (3d Cir. 1999) (explaining that “Supreme Court precedent … clearly require[s] only ‘evidence adequate to create an inference that an employment decision was based on an illegal discriminatory

Sikkelee v. Precision Airmotive Corporation

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

McDougald qualifies her conclusion that there was no evidence of pre-impact aircraft malfunction with the caveat that her investigation was hampered by fire damage. … Sikkelee has clearly laid out her plans for discrediting the evidence Lycoming intends to introduce.