Case law

Ullery v. The Mayflower

75 F. 842 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 3, 1896

Justice Grier said in Gallatin v. The Pilot, 2 Wall. Jr. 592 , Fed. Cas. … l2,229, Brown, Adm. 202 ; The Benton, Fed. Oas. No. 1,334. The libel was confessedly proper as to some of the libelants who were afterwards paid, and would have carried costs.

In re Mellon Bank Shareholder Litigation

120 F.R.D. 35 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 19, 1988

Excluded from the Class are the defendants herein, members of the Boards of Directors of the Company and the Bank, members of their immediate families and any subsidiary, affiliate or controlled person of any such person … Peil v. National Semiconductor Corp., 86 F.R.D. 357 (E.D.Pa.1980).

DATA v. A.O. SMITH CORPORATION

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 17, 2023

Penn Power contended that the same must be pursued and adjudicated before the Worker’s Compensation Appeal Board (Board), and thereby requested a stay. … Anderson v. City of Bessemer, 470 U.S. 564, 573 (1985) (citing United States v. U.S. Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364 (1948)).

INTERN U. OF ELEC. WKRS. v. Westinghouse Elec.

455 F. Supp. 392 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 12, 1978

See Falsetti v. UMW, 355 F.2d 658 (3d Cir. 1966); Liotta v. Natl Forge Co., CA 78-25 Erie (W.D.Pa. May 22, 1978) and Judge Teitelbaum's decision in Fannie v. Chamberlin Mfg. … Co. v.

Miller v. Bare

457 F. Supp. 1359 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 12, 1978

The court in LaGourse v. … Citing Bardwell v.

DOLPH

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 9, 2026

Brown ) United States Magistrate Judge DR. … Brown United States Magistrate Judge

WARMAN v. LOCAL YOKELS FUDGE, LLC

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 30, 2024

To prevail on a Rule 60(b)(3) motion, the moving party must establish, by clear and convincing evidence, Brown v. Pa. R.R. … Ellis v. City of Pittsburgh, 656 F. App’x 606, 610 n.3 (3d Cir. 2016) (citing Montano v. City of Chicago, 535 F.3d 558, 564 (7th Cir. 2008)). See Henderson v. Matthews, 570 F. Supp. 3d 272, 279 (E.D.

Rousso v. Barber

299 F. 801 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 11, 1923

Solomon v. Rousso, 271 Fed. 799 , 50 App. D. C. 333. … In the case of Western Electric Co. v. Fowler, 177 Fed. 224 , 101 C. C.

Chambers Development Co. v. Municipality of Monroeville

617 F. Supp. 820 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 13, 1985

“STATE ACTION” EXEMPTION The Municipality and its officials claim a “state action” exemption from antitrust laws as set out in Parker v. Brown, 317 U.S. 341 , 63 S.Ct. 307 , 87 L.Ed. 315 (1943). … THE CIVIL RIGHTS CLAIM — Count V Count V of Plaintiff’s Complaint charges all defendants with violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 .

PACELY v. TATE

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 2, 2022

See id.; see also Holloman v. Warden Fairton FCI, 635 Fed. … Williams v. McKean, 2019 WL 1118057, at *5 n. 6 (W.D. Pa. Mar. 11, 2019) (citing United States v. Cepero, 224 F.3d 256, 264-65 (3d Cir. 2000), abrogated on other grounds by Gonzalez v.

WEEKLEY v. CLARK

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 31, 2023

Brown v. DiGuglielmo, No. 07-3465, 2007 WL 4242266, at *1 n.2 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 29, 2007) (citing Williams v. … v.

FMC Corp. v. Holliday

731 F. Supp. 710 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 14, 1989

Union Labor Life Insurance Co. v. Pireno, 458 U.S. 119, 129 , 102 S.Ct. 3002, 3008 , 73 L.Ed.2d 647 (1982); Insurance Board Under Social Insurance Plan of Bethlehem Steel Corp. v. … See also Board of Trustees of Montana Teamsters Employers v. Coyne, 628 F.Supp. 561, 564 (D.Mont.1986).

Bremmer v. Shedd

467 F. Supp. 261 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 7, 1979

Although Bremmer had entrusted the operation of his boat to Francis, he was on board and in immediate control of the operator. … S. v. Reliable Transfer Co., supra, since we find equal fault on each party, each party is entitled to recover from the other 50% of his claim.

Judkins v. HT Window Fashions Corp.

624 F. Supp. 2d 427 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 25, 2009

However, we never issued a substantive opinion reviewing the rulings of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (the Board) because the parties settled the ease while Judkins’s motion for summary judgment was pending … The Board eventually awarded Judkins priority over Ford as to the counts of the interferences on the basis that Ford no longer contested the issue and that, on appeal, this court reversed the Board’s prior finding that Judkins

Rinchuse v. Old Republic Insurance

387 F. Supp. 935 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 5, 1975

Co. v. Abilene Cotton Oil Co., 204 U.S. 426, 436 , 27 S.Ct. 350 , 51 L.Ed. 553 (1907); Gen. American Tank Car Corp. v. El Dorado Terminal Co., 308 U.S. 422, 432-433 , 60 S.Ct. 325 , 84 L.Ed. 361 (1940). … Labor Board v. Jones & Laughlin, 301 U.S. 1, 48-49 , 57 S.Ct. 615 , 81 L.Ed. 893 (1937); Luria v. U. S., 231 U.S. 9, 27-28 , 34 S.Ct.10, 58 L.Ed. 101 (1913); Brady v.

PENNSYLVANIA STATE CONFERENCE OF THE NAACP v. SCHMIDT

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 6, 2023

Boards”) [ECF No. 93]. … Dec. 15, 2011); Brody By & Through Sugzdinis v.

United States ex rel. Giovengo v. Maroney

194 F. Supp. 154 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 27, 1961

The testimony at the hearing also indicated that the Parole Board may take into consideration the type of prison in determining whether he should be granted parole. … See Pollard v. United States, supra. The Pennsylvania law seems in agreement as stated by Mr. Justice Jones, now Chief Justice Jones, in Commonwealth ex rel. Holly v.

In re Carmassi, Inc.

121 B.R. 735 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 19, 1990

Tongdee to date has expended $7,300.00 in applying to the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board for approval of the transfer of the liquor license. Said funds may or may not be reimbursable. … Wright v. Preferred Research, Inc., 891 F.2d 886 (11th Cir.1990). In other words, the substance of the motion determines the type of motion that it is. Landau & Cleary, Ltd. v.

Gamlen Chemical Co. v. Gamlen

79 F. Supp. 622 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 29, 1948

Gates Coal Co. v. Gates Coal Co. Inc., 114 Pa. Super. 157, 158 , 174 A. 3 ; Brown Sheet Iron & Steel Co. v. Brown Steel Tank Co., 198 Minn. 276 , 269 N.W. 633 , 107 A.L.R. 1276 . … It is generally true that a surname cannot he appropriated for exclusive use as a trade name, Borden Ice Cream Co. v. Borden’s Condensed Milk Co., 7 Cir., 201 F. 510 ; Brown Chemical Co. v.

Holy Trinity Ukrainian Catholic Church v. Collier Township, et al.

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 8, 2026

On September 9, 2024, Holy Trinity presented the Shrine Project proposal in a public meeting before the Board of Commissioners. ECF No. 77 ¶¶ 59–61. On or around September 9, 2024, the Board denied the proposal. … Schad v.