Case law

Guthrie v. Lady Jane Collieries, Inc.

556 F. Supp. 164 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 8, 1983

The 44% average seems clearly to be substantial enough to satisfy the 50% rule of thumb, in the light of what has been said before regarding the non-crucial character of that rule. … These are enough to establish bona fide substantial performance of management functions. The importance of such functions suffices to make them the employees’ “primary duty.”

Sinchak v. Parente

262 F. Supp. 79 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 29, 1966

Considering the defendant’s motion and arriving at a determination thereon as gauged by our authorities, we examine the averments of the complaint to ascertain whether or not they qualify this action under the Civil Rights … Mo.,1966), summarizes decisions as establishing the civil rights statutes to be directed toward government action, and concludes at page 119: “A long line of cases makes it clear that Section 1983 * * * may be resorted to

United States v. Allen

668 F. Supp. 969 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 11, 1987

Nonetheless, the defendant has the burden of establishing that there are grounds for withdrawal. Id. at 220 . … Innocence and non-guilt are clearly distinct both morally, see, e.g., Aeschylus, The Eumenides; Melville, Billy Budd, Sailor; and legally, see Smith v.

Wensley v. Scott

459 F. Supp. 2d 388 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 15, 2006

A review of the policies behind the state laws at issue in the case sub judice establish that this matter is in fact a false conflict, not a true conflict. … Clearly, Pennsylvania was the place of the vehicular accident and it possesses the interest to see that injuries occurring within Pennsylvania are remedied.

Bayer Corp. & Subsidiaries v. United States

850 F. Supp. 2d 522 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 6, 2012

A federal income tax credit for qualified research expenses, commonly referred to as “QREs,” was established by the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981. … expenditure: 'If the taxpayer can establish that qualified expenses occurred, however, then the court should estimate the allowable tax credit.’

Braden v. University of Pittsburgh

392 F. Supp. 118 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 13, 1975

At a hearing held on October 29, 1974, (after repeated continuances at the request of the parties) the evidence clearly established the facts set forth in this court’s memorandum reported at 343 F.Supp. 836 (1972), save the … The structure of Pitt’s Board of Trustees is established by the University’s By-Laws. Defendants’ Exhibit A.

FUNK

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

Title II of the ADA clearly purports to do so. … . § 794(a) (“No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States ...

United States v. Scalzitti

408 F. Supp. 1014 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 26, 1975

Secs. 6002-6003 entered pursuant to a proper governmental request for immunity. Fanell did testify and subsequently was indicted for alleged violations of various federal criminal statutes. … The latter contention is clearly frivolous and without merit. Defendant is no more stripped of the presumption of innocence by this restraining order than would be the case were he required to post bond.

B.P. v. NORTH ALLEGHENY SCHOOL DISTRICT

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 12, 2022

An exception to qualified immunity can exist if the plaintiff can prove that a government official violated a clearly established statutory or constitutional right. Reichle v. Howards, 566 U.S. 658, 664 (2012). … The Board is considered a local legislative body for purposes of qualified immunity.

United States v. Wetmore

218 F. 227 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 24, 1914

And again: “We are clearly of opinion that no statute which leaves the party or witness subject to prosecution after he answers the criminating question put to him can have the effect of supplanting the privilege conferred … from proscution as to matters sworn to, although the immunity might not extend to prosecutions in a state court.

SIMONDS v. BOYER

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 20, 2022

Judge Hanley is not entitled to qualified immunity at this stage. … Finally, Judge Hanley argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity because the allegations against him “fail to establish that any clear statutory or constitutional right was violated.” ECF 30, p. 8.

Erret v. Pennsylvania

713 F. Supp. 837 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 29, 1989

The officers are entitled to summary judgment unless in light of clearly established precedent, the officers could not have reasonably believed that their actions were justified. … Creighton, supra, chided the majority for creating the specter of a false dichotomy between police entitlement to qualified immunity and police liability for every misstep. 483 U.S. at 647 107 S.Ct. at 3043 , 97 L.Ed.2d at

Reed v. Thomas

385 F. Supp. 266 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 20, 1974

Clearly, the invalidation of a ballot where the voter has complied with all instructions communicated to him and in the absence of any evidence of improper influence having been exerted, invalidation would necessarily amount … regulation, custom or usage, of any State or Territory, 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

Lamanna v. Special Agents Mutual Benefits Ass'n

546 F. Supp. 2d 261 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 6, 2008

It may also be caused by inflammation of pathways in the nervous system which generates a non-specific immune response or process or when a viral illness is complicated by a problem with the body's immune response. … Neal was qualified to address Ms. Lamanna's "mental and nervous impairments” nor was she an occupational therapist or rehabilitation specialist.

MCCUE v. TOWNSHIP OF HANOVER

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 22, 2022

immunity. … The Motion is denied without prejudice with respect to the issue of qualified immunity, consistent with the analysis and discussion set forth in the Report and Recommendation.

DeFalco Ex Rel. DeFalco v. Deer Lake School District

663 F. Supp. 1108 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 13, 1987

Moreover, a single isolated incident, by a teacher or school nurse for instance, does not establish an official policy or practice sufficient to establish Section 1983 liability. See Oklahoma City v. … School officials may be sued under Section 1983 with the limitation that they are entitled to qualified good faith immunity when sued for money damages for official actions taken in good faith. Wood v.

Geniviva v. Bingler

206 F. Supp. 81 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 9, 1961

United States, 232 U.S. 383 , 34 S.Ct. 341, 346 , 58 L.Ed. 652 (1914), established the rule that evidence obtained by federal agents in violation of the defendant’s rights under the Fourth Amendment was inadmissible in a … In Elkins, the Court held that “evidence obtained by state officers during a search which, if conducted by federal officers, would have violated the defendant’s immunity from unreasonable searches and seizures under the Fourth

BELDING v. RUSSO

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 2, 2024

“To earn the protections of absolute immunity at the motion-to-dismiss stage, a [prosecutor] must show that the conduct triggering absolute immunity clearly appears on the face of the complaint.” … Even after that determination, ... a prosecutor may engage in ‘police investigative work’ that is entitled to only qualified immunity.” Id. (quoting Buckley, 509 U.S. at 274 n.5).

SIMONDS v. BOYER

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 12, 2025

The analysis is not finished, however, because Officer Thimons raises a qualified-immunity defense. … Feb. 28, 2020) (turning to clearly established right prong of qualified immunity analysis after denying summary judgment on excessive force claim).

Roach v. American Radio Systems Corp.

80 F. Supp. 2d 530 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 22, 1999

Therefore, ARS maintains, Plaintiff cannot establish, as required to establish a prima facie case of age discrimination, that he was replaced by someone sufficiently younger. … Concerning its not-qualified argument, ARS contends that Plaintiff cannot establish that he was qualified for the on-air/Assistant Program Director position because he admitted that he was not interested in the position and