Case law

Orchard v. Covelli

590 F. Supp. 1548 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 6, 1984

In Donahue v. … He acted in his capacity as counsel for the corporations and as a member of the board of directors.

Du Puy v. Crucible Steel Co. of America

288 F. 583 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 13, 1923

So in Maitland v. … In Halbronn v.

Mims v. Shapp

399 F. Supp. 818 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 15, 1975

Kostal v. Tinsley, 337 F.2d 845 (10th Cir. 1964); Graham v. Willingham, 384 F.2d 367 (10th Cir. 1967) ; Evans v. Moseley, 455 F.2d 1084 (10th Cir. 1972); Courtney v. Bishop, 409 F.2d 1185 (8th Cir. 1969) ; Sostre v. … Ford v. Board of Managers of New Jersey State Prison, 407 F.2d 937 (3d Cir. 1969).

BUTLER v. FLOYD

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 21, 2025

Although Plaintiff takes issue with this legal premise, the Court finds that Judge Brown correctly stated and applied the law. See id. (citing Hannan v. City of Phila., 306 F. … See Mitchell v.

Railway Labor Executives Ass'n v. Pittsburgh & Lake Erie Railroad

680 F. Supp. 192 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 24, 1987

Andrews v. Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company, 406 U.S. 320 , 92 S.Ct. 1562 , 32 L.Ed.2d 95 (1972). The Supreme Court, in Union Pacific Railroad Company v. … Leu v. Norfolk and Western Railway Company, supra; Lewy v. Southern Pacific Transportation Company, 799 F.2d 1281 (9th Cir.1986); Minehart v. Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company, 731 F.2d 342 (6th Cir.1984).

In re Carrier

39 F. 193 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 28, 1889

Tucker v. Oxley, 5 Branch, 34; Gray v. Rollo, 18 Wall. 629 . Therefore Arthurs is entitled to set off the debt of Baum to him on the McCrea & Co. notes against his own indebtedness to Baum. Id. … Withers v. Baird, 7 Watts, 227 ; Magaw v. Lothrop, 4 Watts & S. 316 ; Garrett v. Crosson, 32 Pa. St. 373.

United States ex rel. Collins v. Ashe

90 F. Supp. 463 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · May 1, 1950

Commonwealth’s Exhibit “A” — Application for Parole to the Board of Trustees of Western State Penitentiary of Pennsylvania, dated Jan. 17, 1936. … Commonwealth’s Exhibit “H” — Record of proceedings of the Parole Board of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

Lewis v. United States Internal Revenue Service (In re Alexander's Graham Bell, Inc.)

59 B.R. 95 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 13, 1986

See 21 West Lancaster Corp. v. Main Line Restaurant, infra; JFWIRS, Ltd. v. U.S., infra. The federally controlling case law on this question is Morgan v. … In 21 West Lancaster Corp. v.

Hufnagel v. Ciamacco

281 F.R.D. 238 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 20, 2012

Hufnagel initially paid boarding costs to Ciamacco, but in August 2009, she began making a single monthly payment to Bryner, who then paid boarding costs to Ciamacco. (Docket No. 38 at ¶¶ 10-11). … In Blackburn v.

Kennametal, Inc. v. International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft & Agricultural Implement Workers

161 F. Supp. 362 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 22, 1958

In the meantime the plaintiff corporation had taken action requesting that the National Labor Relations Board not certify the Auto Workers as a bargaining agent. … Westinghouse Electric Corporation, 348 U.S. 437 , 75 S.Ct. 488 , 99 L.Ed. 510 , and Textile Workers Union of America v.

Higgins v. Shenango Pottery Co.

99 F. Supp. 522 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 28, 1951

Justice Jackson in Koster v. … Ramsey v. Home Mortg. Co., D.C.E.D.N.C.1931, 47 F.2d 621 . As observed by Mr. Justice Brown in Dickerman v.

Wirtz v. Local 11, International Hod Carriers' Building & Common Laborers' Union

211 F. Supp. 408 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 4, 1962

Jack Williams, et al.” the General Secretary-Treasurer stated as follows: “This is to officially notify you of the following action of the General Executive Board, taken at its meeting held in Washington, D. … «v. • ,, T , ,. , tt • Being the Internationa^ Union denied our protest and having exhausted all our internal remedies as per Constitution, we have no other alternative but to seek your intervention into this matter”.

Jaillet v. Hill & Hill

460 F. Supp. 1075 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 16, 1978

The Plaintiff relies on dicta in Snyder v. … . § 301 et seq., specifically defines the “board” of an authority to be its governing body and specifically empowers the organizing municipality to appoint the members of the board whose prescribed terms of office will commence

Westinghouse Salaried Employees Ass'n v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.

217 F. Supp. 622 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · May 14, 1963

Complaints first go to the National Labor Relations Board and, on review, to the Court of Appeals. … See San Diego Building Trades Council, etc. v.

Claude Neon Lights, Inc. v. Gardner Sign Co.

39 F.2d 487 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 30, 1929

Co. v. *489 Brown, 114 F. 939 , held that a delay from January 4,1897, to October 8,1900, in applying for a preliminary injunction, would not bar the right to it. … See Deere & Webber Co. v. Dowagiac Mfg. Co. (C. C. A.) 153 F. 177 ; General Electric Co. v. New England Electric Mfg. Co. (C. C. A.) 128 F. 738 . The motion for a preliminary injunction will be granted.

Kuhar v. Greensburg-Salem School District

466 F. Supp. 806 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 27, 1979

Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. Murgia, 427 U.S. 307 , 96 S.Ct. 2562 , 49 L.Ed.2d 520 (1976). … This Court does hereby apply to the facts of this matter the “rational basis test” as required by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Massachusetts Board of Retirement v.

Gigliotti v. Redevelopment Auth. of City of New Castle

362 F. Supp. 764 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 24, 1973

Co. v. … members of the Authority must also be dismissed because of the lack of any specific allegations of any actions by themselves other than collectively as the Authority’s board. 1 .

MOJICA-MENDOZA

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 24, 2025

Brown FCI LORETTO WARDEN, ) Respondent. … Upon review of the record and the Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 27, under the applicable “reasoned consideration” standard, see EEOC v.

Range Resources-Appalachia, LLC v. Blaine Township

649 F. Supp. 2d 412 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 23, 2009

In Cooper v. … See United States v.

CHAN

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 14, 2026

Brown, United States Magistrate Judge I. … Brown Christopher B.