Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
1,938 results
2.09s
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 4, 2026
The Court concludes that Defendants have not carried their acknowledged burden to establish that UHPA is an indispensable party. … established at the U-Haul International level and implemented uniformly across locations . . . .
Cited 0 timesUnknownM.T. v. UNIONTOWN AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 3, 2021
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 … Johns-Manville Corp., the Court concluded that although the complaints at issue did not state “magic words,” the allegations of the complaints “clearly raised the fact” encompassing the magic phrase. 798 F.2d 93, 99 (3d
Cited 0 timesUnknownYAZICI v. SULLIVAN'S OF PITTSBURGH, LLC
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 29, 2025
It is for this reason that Defendants now purport to rely on the emails attached to the Motion to Dismiss to establish the date of the adverse employment action. ECF No. 55-5. … agrees with Defendants. 10 To make out a prima facie case of disparate treatment discrimination, a plaintiff must allege that: (1) he belonged to a protected class; (2) he was qualified
Cited 0 timesUnknownTISDALE v. PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 1, 2024
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals recently recognized in Williams that “precedents leave no room for doubt that individuals with a known history of serious mental illness have a clearly established right not to be subjected … Tisdale “[did] not qualify for a higher mental health treatment placement.” Id. at ¶ 211. Additionally, in July 2021, “in evaluating the psychiatric condition of Mr.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 15, 2022
No showing of prejudice on the order of manifest injustice can be established. … established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court.
Cited 0 timesUnknownRAPTIS v. DPS LAND SERVICES, LLC
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · May 21, 2020
These allegations clearly satisfy the pleading standard set forth by Davis. … has qualified for the administrative-employee exemption.5 Pl.’s Br.
Cited 0 timesUnknown220 F. Supp. 2d 430 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 19, 2002
See Leggett, 162 F.3d at 250 (“We do not hesitate to conclude that such an attack qualifies as the sort of ‘extremely serious misconduct’ that amounts to the forfeiture of the right to counsel.”) (citation omitted). … counsel; so long as the district court has given the defendant sufficient opportunity to retain the assistance of appointed counsel, defendant’s actions which have the effect of depriving himself of appointed counsel will establish
Cited 2 timesPublishedDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 4, 2021
Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), the familiar clearly established federal law governing ineffective assistance of counsel claims. … For AEDPA purposes, the Strickland test qualifies as “clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court.” Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 391 (2000).
Cited 0 timesUnknownCHUBB NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY v. D'CUNHA
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 31, 2023
(“A motion for judgment on the pleadings may be granted where the movant clearly establishes that no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” … In short, the underlying third-party complaint very clearly asserts claims caused by the provision of medical services by Drs.
Cited 0 timesUnknown151 F. Supp. 514 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · May 14, 1957
Plaintiff at all of the times hereinafter mentioned was, and now is, the duly appointed, qualified and acting executrix of the estate of John W. … deductions and credits * * shall be taken for the taxable year in which ‘paid or accrued’ or ‘paid or incurred’, dependent upon the method of accounting upon the basis of which the net income is computed, unless in order to clearly
Cited 6 timesPublishedKOWAL v. FERNDALE AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 29, 2021
Nevertheless, even if Ferndale’s actions qualified as such, Kowal fails to fully establish the third element of a prima facie case of retaliation as discussed in the next section. B. … Ferndale clearly indicates that, among several reasons, Kowal’s contact with the EEOC was a factor in the Board’s decision to decline Kowal’s meeting request. (Id.).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 19, 2024
Kehl alleges that Defendants “create[ed], form[ed], enact[ed], and implement[ed]” the County’s COVID-19 vaccine policy “intentionally to deprive, substantive and procedural due process, in addition to violating, clearly … establish [sic] law and denial of religious liberties.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownPension Benefit Guaranty Corp. v. Greene
570 F. Supp. 1483 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 16, 1983
The Plans are tax-qualified defined benefit pension plans which are covered by Title IV of ERISA. The Bollinger Union Plan terminated effective December 20, 1976. … The PBGC was established pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1302 . 2 .
Cited 29 timesPublishedWALNEY v. SHELL LEGACY HOLDINGS LLC
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 31, 2022
fact.”); id. §222(3) (“Unless otherwise agreed, a usage of trade in the vocation or trade in which the parties are engaged or a usage of trade of which they know or have reason to know gives meaning to or supplements or qualifies … To the extent enforceable contracts can be established, and to the extent Plaintiffs can establish a contractual breach based upon SWEPI’s rescission of the lease during the time period set forth on the bank drafts, Plaintiffs
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 28, 2024
In December 2014, Plaintiff was diagnosed with myositis, an “auto-immune disease that causes muscle inflammation.” Compl. ¶ 17. … “physically qualified for retention in the Navy Reserve.” Id. One month later, the Navy “honorably discharged” Plaintiff, with notice given by letter confirming the same.
Cited 0 timesUnknownBOYER v. CLEARFIELD COUNTY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 26, 2025
First, Section 9.1 clearly requires Villella “to protect, exonerate, defend, indemnify, and save harmless the Authority and the Bank ... against any and all loss, damage, cost, expense, or liability” arising out of or … This fact is undisputed by Villella [Doc. 238 § 48]. 11 Under Pennsylvania law, exculpatory clauses immunize a party from the consequences of his or her negligent performance
Cited 0 timesUnknownSTALLWORTH v. WEIBLINGERS RESIDENTIAL CARE, INC.
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 23, 2025
Marbury further informed plaintiff that plaintiff's current assignment qualified for the bonus. A week later, on October 15, 2022, plaintiff texted Marbury regarding an incident with a "difficult" client. … Here, the record clearly supports a finding that the harassment occurred in one isolated incident.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 26, 2022
She believes it to be clearly retaliatory and done for improper political purpose. … To establish a prima facie case of sex discrimination, a plaintiff must show (1) she is a member of a protected class, (2) she is qualified for her position, (3) she suffered an adverse employment action, and (4)
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 10, 2019
Based on this RFC, Plaintiff established that she is incapable of returning to her past employment; therefore, the ALJ moved on to Step Five. (R. 22). … The Court cannot make this assumption, and therefore it will remand the matter so that the ALJ can more clearly explain how she came to her findings.
Cited 0 timesUnknownWRIGHT v. PROVIDENCE CARE CENTER, LLC
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 24, 2019
To qualify as direct evidence, however, no such inference is permissible. See Weightman, 772 F. Supp. 2d at 702. … Wright must first establish a prima facie case of discrimination by showing that: (1) she has a disability; (2) she was qualified for the position with or without a reasonable accommodation; and (3) she suffered an adverse
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna