Case law

Settlers Hospitality Group, LLC v. Zurich American Insurance Company

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 24, 2025

In other words, the PPP loan and the CD Coverage are not so clearly co-extensive that summary judgment is appropriate. … The Count Basie court, as well as Zurich in this matter, reasoned that this language clearly refers to the $100,000 limit in the Declaration “per occurrence.”3 (Doc. 52-2, at 33).

Abington Kids Creative Learning Center, Inc. v. Utica National Insurance Group

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 16, 2023

It follows that a “detrimental economic impact unaccompanied by a distinct, demonstrable, physical alteration of the property” does not qualify as “physical” loss or damage. See id. … Here, the none of the allegations in Abington Kids’ pleadings are capable of establishing a prima facie case for relief under the Policy.

Pompa v. St. Luke's Hospital

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · May 23, 2025

o The example below [screenshot omitted] does not qualify for 1:1 It is not my intent to micromanage but it is imperative that we are 100% ethical in our performance. … Because this is clearly a factual question, summary judgment is in fact rarely appropriate in this type of case.

Lee v. Golf Transportation, Inc.

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 7, 2023

It is well-established that the phrase “other provisions having the force and effect of law” includes common law rules. See Northwest, Inc. v. … Ginsberg, 572 U.S. 273, 281–82 (2014) (noting that common law rules are frequently called “provisions” and clearly have the “force and effect of law”); Gillum, 2020 WL 444371, at *3 (noting that courts “share an understanding

Comacho v. Quay

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

Facts Concerning Parole and Parole Proceedings Federal inmates who are subject to the Parole Act may qualify for one of two types of parole: discretionary or mandatory (also known as two-thirds) parole … In the instant case, the record establishes that Petitioner appeared before Examiner Kubic for a parole hearing on July 10, 2019. (Doc. No. 15-2 at 4.)

Fernandez v. O'Malley

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · May 15, 2025

Cir. 2011) (referencing 20 C.F.R. §404.1529(a) (“statements about your pain or other symptoms will not alone establish that you are disabled”). … However, to qualify for benefits by showing that an impairment, or 30 combination of impairments, is equivalent to a listed impairment, a plaintiff

Bordner v. Saul

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 18, 2022

To qualify for - 10 - disability insurance benefits, the claimant must establish that she was disabled prior to the date she was last insured. … Thus, the ALJ clearly explained how Dr. Grutowski’s opinion was supported by and consistent with evidence in the record.4 (Doc. 9-2, at 23).

Holmes v. American Home Patient/Lincare

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

In that decision, Justice Alito clearly differentiated these two issues. … My review has raised questions as to whether the evidence submitted is sufficient to establish her prima facie case.

Taylor v. K N B's INFLATABLES PLEASE, LLC

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 25, 2025

State criminal law, however, is clearly within Officer Estep’s purview. … Summary offenses are punishable by up to ninety (90) days imprisonment and a fine of up to $300.00 when no higher fine is established. 18 PA. CONs. STAT. §§ 1101, 1105.

Mariani v. United States

80 F. Supp. 2d 352 · District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 27, 1999

Its solution as to their admissibility is clearly stated in the final paragraph of its report on this Rule. … Clearly, the Minority Report meets the threshold requirement of being authorized by law.

Riley v. Lusk

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

Under the pleading regime established by Twombly and Iqbal, a court reviewing the sufficiency of a complaint must take three steps. … joined whether they sound in contract, tort, or both.”70 Here, Defendant argues that Plaintiffs should have joined their retaliation claim brought under the United States Constitution with their defamation claim (clearly

Bishop v. University of Scranton

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 17, 2023

Here, the University does not qualify as a state actor under any of the tests. … This act demonstrates hostility toward Plaintiff that clearly affected the union’s ability to represent Plaintiff fairly. (Doc. 26, at 12).

Western Star Hospital Authority Inc. v. McCaffrey

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 23, 2022

Applicable Legal Standard The CDA “provides a narrow waiver of the United States’ sovereign immunity.” See Sys. Application & Techs., Inc. v. … However, the Court will dismiss Count II as to the Non-Federal Defendants with prejudice, as those claims are clearly time-barred.12 The Court has further concluded, as to the VA Defendants, that it lacks subject matter

Henderson v. Pennsylvania State University

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 21, 2022

establishe[d] that Penn State is a state actor.”60 And, although Penn State’s status as a state actor was not directly discussed in Nicholas v. … should be sufficient for purposes of the continuing-violation doctrine, even if the act would otherwise qualify as a discrete act that is independently actionable.”97 Two other Courts of Appeals that have considered this

Avco Corporation v. Turn and Bank Holdings, LLC.

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 22, 2020

decided at summary judgment.26 Second, TNB contends that Holt is not sufficiently qualified to testify regarding naming conventions for pressure carburetors and/or fuel injection servos.27 TNB argues that Holt’s testimony … be double- dipping in light of the then pending North Carolina action.”42 As to Precision’s contention that Avco agreed not to supplement Holt’s opinion based upon the LFC/LFR data, given the clearly

Alexandre

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

Amendment 821 to the USSG, which became effective on November 1, 2023, amended USSG § 4A1.1(e) and created USSG § 4C1.1, which benefits qualifying defendants, either through a lower criminal history score, see U.S.S.G. … ‘voluntary’ as clearly stated in BOP policies and cited by BOP’s answers, may the BOP force inmates to sign the [IFRP] contract and severely punish them when their family cannot afford the arbitrary amount unilaterally

Garanin v. City of Scranton

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 31, 2021

To the extent that supervisory liability survives after Iqbal, the scope of that liability is clearly and narrowly defined. … The Court qualified its decision, however, noting that: Since our holding emphasizes the controlling standard of reasonableness, nothing we say today is intended to foreclose prompt

Knight v. Avco Corporation

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 9, 2024

First, the cited portions of the Sky Ranch Manual clearly discuss the different designs of the Lycoming and Continental engines.272 Second, Sommer explained during his deposition that the failures of the Continental … for the boat, the failure to establish the reliability of the second part of his 326 Abrisch v.

Gottstein v. Finley

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 10, 2020

April 10, 2020) (the court held that since defendant did not exhaust his BOP administrative remedies as required, “it [did] not decide whether he has established that there are ‘extraordinary and compelling … As this court recently stated in Cruz, 2020 WL 1904476, *4 and in Cordaro, 2020 WL 2084960, *7, “the determination of which inmates qualify for home confinement under the CARES Act is with the BOP Director.”

Matos

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 10, 2025

Cowan are highly qualified experts who had the opportunity to review the claimant’s records. (Tr. 28). … First, when presented with a disputed factual record, it is well- established that “[t]he ALJ – not treating or examining physicians or State agency consultants – must make the ultimate disability and RFC determinations.