Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
1,938 results
0.61s
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 23, 2019
Also, although the Third Circuit has held that various periods of time between a claimant’s birthday and the cutoff date for an age category can qualify as a borderline situation, it has declined to establish any precise … Upon review of the ALJ’s analysis, the Court finds that the ALJ clearly considered the facts of this particular case in determining that use of the higher age category of the Grids was inappropriate here.
Cited 0 timesUnknownLINNABARY v. SEQUIUM ASSET SOLUTIONS, LLC
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 2, 2024
Some tangible harms, such as physical injuries or monetary losses, “readily qualify as concrete injuries.” Id. at 425. Intangible harms can also qualify as concrete injuries. Id. … Owed under Section 1692(e) SAS asserts that its initial Collection Letter, dated January 28, 2022, and Verification Response Email, dated April 22, 2022, both correctly and clearly
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 21, 2026
A district court may grant a new trial, or remittitur, only where the compensatory damages award is “clearly unsupported and/or excessive.” Spence, 806 F.2d at 1201. … Zaydenberg’s testimony—together—is sufficient to establish that Ms. Simonds suffered emotional distress because of Ms. Boyer’s actions. See, e.g., Cortez v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownBLANK RIVER SERVICES, INC. v. TOWLINE RIVER SERVICE, INC.
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 21, 2019
The second factor clearly weighs against abstention. … And, therefore, the fifth factor clearly weighs against abstention as well. See Moses H. Cone Mem’l Hosp. v. Mercury Constr.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 12, 2019
Kagel has clearly added significant facts and opinions to his affidavit that were not present in the original. … Brooks is not qualified in jurisdictional determinations. Id. 87 at 3–4.
Cited 0 timesUnknownWEAVER v. GAT AIRLINE GROUND SUPPORT, INC.
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 15, 2025
“Under that familiar test, the plaintiff must first establish a prima facie case of discrimination by showing that: (1) s/he is a member of a protected class; (2) s/he was qualified for the position s/he sought to attain … Because this is clearly a factual question, summary judgment is in fact rarely appropriate in this type of case.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownCarnegie Mellon University v. Marvell Technology Group, Ltd.
986 F. Supp. 2d 574 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 23, 2013
Nor is the verdict clearly unsupported such that remittitur is warranted. … Moreover, no established fee exists.
Cited 4 timesPublishedDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 17, 2026
Young’s claim would not qualify for Stop Loss coverage due to policy dates as well as the fact that Mr. Young’s coverage terminated as of January 1, 2022. Id. at ¶ 34. … While the Plan casts its claim as specific performance, the Amended Complaint clearly seeks reimbursement under the Plan’s contractual terms with ULLICO.
Cited 0 timesUnknownJOHNSON v. CITY OF ERIE POLICE BUREAU DEPT. ERIE, PA
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 22, 2020
, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State ..., 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 … Moreover, “‘[t]o have a property interest in a benefit, a person clearly must have more than an abstract need or desire’ and ‘more than a unilateral expectation of it.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 28, 2020
Because the ALJ found that Plaintiff’s bipolar disorder and her polysubstance abuse, reportedly in remission, are severe impairments, Plaintiff does have a condition that could potentially qualify as a disorder under such … The ALJ further found that the evidence fails to establish the presence of the “paragraph C” criteria, although, as noted, Plaintiff does not appear to disagree with this finding.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 30, 2020
When In saw Stroup a week later, Stroup refused to conduct a biopsy even though he was qualified to do so because “in my personal opinion, that’s just too 3 In refers to his condition Fordyce spots. … Twombly, 550 USS. at 570 (rejecting the traditional 12 (b)(6) standard established in Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 (1957).
Cited 0 timesUnknownROHEILA v. MCKEESPORT AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 26, 2022
Each of these conditions to establish associational standing are met here. … Second, in bringing this suit, the charter schools seek to protect their students’ statutory right to receive school transportation~ an interest clearly related to the charter schools’ purpose of educating its students
Cited 0 timesUnknownKlein v. Commerce Energy, Inc.
256 F. Supp. 3d 563 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 21, 2017
The court does not disagree that a call charge on the “front end” might qualify for purposes of the charged call provision under the TCPA. … A decision to revisit should be limited to where the prior decision was clearly erroneous or where the prior decision would work a manifest injustice, such as where: ' (1) new evidence is available; (2) a supervening new
Cited 13 timesPublishedARCONIC CORPORATION v. NOVELIS INC.
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 18, 2022
The record establishes that Arconic suffered no actual damages from Novelis’ alleged breach. … In sum, the measure of restitutionary or reliance damages from Novelis’ alleged disclosure of the 7 CI is clearly $0.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 27, 2020
The defendant must prove one of the four affirmative defenses “so clearly that no rational jury could have found to the contrary.” Del. Dep't of Health, 865 F.2d at 1414. … To establish a prima facie case of pay discrimination under Title VII, a plaintiff must show that she was: (1) a member of a protected class; (2) qualified for the position (3) suffered an adverse employment action; and
Cited 0 timesUnknownKIEHLMEIER-STRATTON v. WEXFORD HEALTH SOURCES, INC.
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 6, 2023
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570 (rejecting the traditional Rule 12 (b)(6) standard established in Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 (1957)). … While the constraints placed on him may be relevant to other issues, such as potential qualified immunity, these issues are not presently before the Court.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 24, 2023
For the defendant to carry this burden, the defendant must “clearly set forth” a nondiscriminatory reason. Texas Dep't of Cmty. Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 255 (1981). … To establish a prima facie case, Plaintiff must present evidence sufficient to show that (1) she belongs to a protected class, (2) she was qualified for the position in question, (3) she was subjected to an adverse employment
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 21, 2025
As Defendants themselves state, the Copyright Act restricts the set of people who are entitled to bring a civil action for infringement to those who qualify as ‘the legal or beneficial owner of an exclusive right under … This clearly demonstrates that there were available avenues for Defendants to access the Copyrighted Work.
Cited 0 timesUnknownATWOOD v. FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM, INC.
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 29, 2025
The movant bears the burden of establishing the need for a transfer, and a plaintiff’s choice of forum should not be lightly disturbed. Jumara, 55 F.3d at 879. … period; (2) they drove, at any point, a vehicle with a Gross Vehicle Weight Rating of less than 10,001 pounds; (3) they worked more than 40 hours in any given week; and (4) they were not, in fact, paid overtime for those qualifying
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 16, 2019
As such, the Union is clearly entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees. See Oberneder v. … Appeals for the Third Circuit has held that a district court should still use the interrelatedness analysis in determining whether the amount of awarded attorneys’ fees should include the work done on claims which do not qualify
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna