Case law

WILLIAMS v. NYBERG

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 24, 2022

Plaintiff first asserts that the Magistrate Judge’s R&R is clearly erroneous and contrary to law. … For purposes of establishing a substantive due process claim, Plaintiff has not pled facts to establish the deprivation of a fundamental right or interest, nor has he alleged conduct on the part of any Defendant that was

MURPHY v. HUB PARKING TECHNOLOGY USA, INC.

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 22, 2024

On March 22, 2022, a Domestic Relations Order was sent to HUB and HUB then had two years to evaluate the Order and determine it if was a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO). … In short, a Motion to Dismiss should not be granted if a party alleges facts, which could, if established at trial, entitle him/her to relief.

DECKER v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 27, 2024

Has Plaintiff Sufficiently Pled that He is a Qualified Individual with a Disability? The ADA clearly extends to state prisoners. See Penn. Dep’t of Corr. v. … Yeskey, 524 U.S. 206, 209-10 (1998) and identifies blind individuals as qualified. See 28 C.F.R.

Jamison v. A. M. Byers Co.

222 F. Supp. 475 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 19, 1962

It is believed that the jury’s verdict established liability under the evidence with the application of the law as found in Section 414 of the Restatement. … The said contract will be admitted in to evidence, the terms of which are clearly stated At the pretrial conference Judge Miller referred to plaintiff’s exhibits and the stipulation.

FOOKS v. LUTHER

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · May 13, 2021

Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), the familiar clearly established federal law governing ineffective assistance of counsel claims. … Here, the “clearly established Federal law” is that which is set forth in Strickland (and its progeny, such as Hill). See, supra.

Weiss v. Bank of America Corp.

153 F. Supp. 3d 830 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 22, 2015

According to the Complaint, said “reinsurance premiums” in fact failed to qualify as such, as the contracts between reinsurance corporations, like BARC, and private mortgage insurers, were structured so that the reinsurer … Dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) pursuant to a statute of limitations is-proper only “where the complaint facially shows noncompliance with the limitations period and the affirmative defense clearly appears on the face of the

Burney v. Housing Authority of County of Beaver

551 F. Supp. 746 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 20, 1982

Thus, the quota plans clearly were designed and necessary to prevent incipient racial segregation at the two high schools. h.) precise tailoring of quota plan Our finding that the Housing Authority has failed to meet its … Once plaintiff has established a prima facie case, the burden then shifts to defendant to establish a justification for acts resulting in discriminatory effects.

Leighty Ex Rel. Leighty v. Laurel School District

457 F. Supp. 2d 546 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 12, 2006

The Court of Appeals rejected the notion that “the conferral of any benefit, no matter how small, could qualify as an ‘appropriate education’ under the EHA.” Id. … Amy’s parents, who also testified at the hearing, clearly believe that her progress has been less than satisfactory.

Shontz v. RITE AID OF PENNSYLVANIA INC.

619 F. Supp. 2d 197 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 24, 2008

Plaintiff is over forty, was qualified for his position at the time of termination, and was discharged from his job. … This is clearly supported by plaintiffs own admission that he provided a non-employee with an employee name badge thereby knowingly violating Rite Aid’s policy and there is not sufficient evidence adduced to show the reason

VANDERVOORT v. PENNSYLVANIA SCHOOL BOARD ASSOCIATION

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 30, 2022

Vandervoort cannot prove that the School Board members, in their individual capacity, violated a clearly established statutory or constitutional right. … Her claims against the individual School Board members are dismissed on grounds of legislative immunity.

Johnson v. Clearfield Area School District

319 F. Supp. 2d 583 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · May 18, 2004

Notwithstanding the insufficiency of the petition, the Court questions whether $38,271.00 is a reasonable portion of the settlement amount where the minor child has a “mental disability that qualifies her for [lifetime] services … Comparatively, Pa.R.Civ.P.2039(b) has also been interpreted to provide that where attorneys' fees and costs "were to be paid with moneys not drawn from the fund established for the benefit of a minor or minors, the Court

Davis v. Pittsburgh Public Schools

930 F. Supp. 2d 570 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 13, 2013

If no qualified candidate has been identified, an Emergency Permit application can be submitted. (ECF No. 60-8 at 6.) … The PDE memorandum was attached to the letter and provided that chapter 339.41(5) “clearly mandates the requirement of a Vocational Supervisory or Vocational Director Certificate if 50% or more of an educator’s assignment

Pritchard v. Dow Agro Sciences

255 F.R.D. 164 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 5, 2009

This would clearly prejudice Plaintiffs and is an untenable result given that there is no evidence of record that Plaintiffs themselves caused any delays in this ease, including the submission of the untimely RFAs. … They arise from the lymphoid components of the immune system, and present a clinical picture broadly similar to that of Hodgkin’s disease except the disease is more widespread.”

Delta Star, Inc. v. Patton

76 F. Supp. 2d 617 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 10, 1999

. § 1001 et seq., that invests primarily in “qualifying employer securities,” which, typically, are shares of stock in the employer that created the ESOP. 29 U.S.C. § 1107 (d)(6)(A). 10. … Patton, therefore, must establish the complete fairness of these transactions to this Court. Merritt, 505 A.2d at 764 (citations omitted). 18.

BURLEY

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 23, 2026

The Commonwealth did not establish a prima facie case, but Plaintiff was bound over for trial on four charges. (Id. ¶¶ 50-51.) … Att’y Gen., 655 F.3d 333, 339 (3d Cir. 2011) (“The obligation to liberally construe a pro se litigant’s pleadings is well- established.”).

NESBY v. YELLEN

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

To recover under the Rehabilitation Act a plaintiff must establish that: (1) she has a disability; (2) she is otherwise qualified to perform the essential functions of the job, with or without … Because Plaintiff’s requested accommodations are unreasonable as a matter of law, she cannot establish that she is a “qualified individual” subject to the protections of the Rehabilitation Act.

Eastern Associated Coal Corp. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

475 F. Supp. 586 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 22, 1979

Plaintiff, Eastern Associated Coal Corporation, a corporation incorporated under the laws of West Virginia with its principal *588 office in that state but also qualified to do business in Pennsylvania with offices in Pittsburgh … The jury was clearly instructed that if they believed plaintiff’s testimony in this respect, they would be entitled to consider these losses on purchases of brokerage coal and substitute coal as covered by the policy.

ZERFA v. ACOSTA, INC

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 30, 2023

To establish a prima facie case of sex discrimination, a plaintiff must show that: (1) she is part of a protected class; (2) she was qualified for her position; (3) despite these qualifications, she was terminated; and … Plaintiff argues that she can clearly establish her prima facie case of sex discrimination here.

BURBACH v. ARCONIC CORPORATION

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

A defendant bears the burden of establishing that a plaintiff’s complaint fails to state a claim. Gould Elecs. Inc. v. … “To establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination under the ADA, the employee must show that he (1) is a disabled person within the meaning of the ADA; (2) is qualified to perform the essential functions of

Roseman v. Hassler

382 F. Supp. 1328 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 24, 1974

Philadelphia Board of Public Education, 453 Pa. 584 , 305 A.2d 877 (1973) might apply and instead is included in the sovereign immunity of *1335 the Commonwealth. … In this particular case, statements and letters, and so forth from the chairman of the department are clearly without authority, and plaintiff can base no legal claim to tenure upon them. See Commonwealth v.