Case law

SCOTT v. PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 28, 2025

established legal rights. … Qualified immunity therefore operates to additionally protect the defendants involved in the use of force on December 29, 2021 from liability at the “sometimes hazy border between excessive and acceptable force,” unless

GENESS v. COUNTY OF FAYETTE

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 31, 2021

We found the AOPC could not invoke sovereign immunity and, as an entity, could not invoke judicial immunity.18 The AOPC appealed. … The court of appeals in Geness II found the AOPC entitled to sovereign immunity, but did not address whether an entity can invoke judicial immunity.19 Applying the United States v.

Caldon, Inc. v. Advanced Measurement & Analysis Group, Inc.

515 F. Supp. 2d 565 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 7, 2007

Noerr-Pennington Immunity Defendants also assert that Cal-don’s claims are barred by the NoeirPennington doctrine. … However, misrepresentations made in only in regulatory submissions do not qualify as commercial speech under the Lanham Act. See In re Warfarin Sodium Antitrust Litig., No.

Wicker v. Consolidated Rail Corp.

371 F. Supp. 2d 702 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 24, 2005

He is clearly qualified to speak on matters of chemical engineering. *717 Our second inquiry under Daubert and the Third Circuit’s Paoli III analysis is to review the reliability of the methods used by Dr. Kopstein. … In addition, the Plaintiff, having been deposed in this matter, and such deposition being referenced in the Release in question clearly establishes that the Plaintiff was aware, of the claims he was releasing by his signature

DiVecchio v. Gimbel Bros.

40 F.R.D. 311 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 13, 1966

What constitutes ■“doing business” is prescribed by the .Act. 3 The evidence produced by the affidavit of Walter Shutte, chief of the -export department of Kynast, the answers to interrogatories and the depositions clearly … Because plaintiffs have failed to sustain their burden of establishing the jurisdictional requirements, the additional defendant’s motion to dismiss must be granted. An appropriate order will be entered* .

TATEL v. MT. LEBANON SCHOOL DISTRICT

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 27, 2022

In Gruenke, the majority held (at the summary judgment stage) that because the right to familial privacy was not clearly established, the teacher/coach was entitled to qualified immunity. … The claims of qualified immunity are denied without prejudice with respect to those claims. As discussed above, the familial privacy, Equal Protection and child right to privacy claims are less clearly established.

Grine v. Coombs

214 F.R.D. 312 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · May 5, 2003

the Commonwealth Defendants bore the burden of establishing their entitlement to Eleventh Amendment immunity. … The narrator describes it clearly as "an 85 gallon overpack drum.” It is turned upside down, with a spout clearly visible.

Fried v. Granger

105 F. Supp. 564 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 13, 1952

On or about August 2, 1945, the plaintiffs filed a Federal Estate Tax Return indicating a tax of $4,561.97, which was paid to Stanley Granger 'as the duly qualified Collector of Internal Revenue for.the 23rd District of Pennsylvania … While the evidence establishes that he neither retained possession of the policy nor paid the premiums thereon, it did not establish that he had relinquished all incidents of ownership.

Mueller v. CBS, Inc.

200 F.R.D. 227 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 31, 2001

Standard of Review As the moving party, Plaintiffs have the burden of establishing that all relevant requirements of Rule 23 have been met. Walsh v. … It is well-established in this Circuit that joinder is impracticable and' thus the numerosity requirement is satisfied if the proposed class numbers 100 or more. Welch v.

Boyles v. American Heritage Life Insurance Co.

226 F. Supp. 3d 497 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 28, 2016

Gross monthly income is the total income before taxes and any pre-tax deductions made under a qualified deferred compensation plan recognized by the Internal Revenue Service. … As a salaried employee, the mere fact that Boyles received his full pay did not establish that he worked full-time.

MILLER v. WILLIAMS

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 31, 2024

Finally, even had Plaintiff overcome all the hurdles already discussed, he offers no resistance to Defendants’ assertion of qualified immunity. Rivera v. … officials entitled to qualified immunity).

Waldo v. North American Van Lines, Inc.

669 F. Supp. 722 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 4, 1987

As such, NAVL contends that its exclusive dealing arrangements are immune from antitrust scrutiny. … Thus, we find the exclusive dealing provisions to be immune from antitrust scrutiny.

DAVIS

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

To state a claim, a plaintiff must sufficiently plead that “(1) he is a qualified individual; (2) with a disability; (3) who was excluded from participation in or denied the benefits of services, programs, or activities … There are ten exceptions to sovereign immunity, nine of which clearly do not apply here. 42 Pa. C.S.

WASHINGTON v. CAPTAIN CRUM

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 16, 2022

as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” … The court, therefore, overrules Washington’s objections based upon the doctrine of qualified immunity.

Church of American Knights of the Ku Klux Klan v. City of Erie

99 F. Supp. 2d 583 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 25, 2000

the hood, mask or other identity-concealing device with one or more specified “intents,” to wit: (a) With the intent to deprive any person or class of persons of the equal protection of the laws or of equal privileges and immunities … The Supreme Court has instructed that conduct may qualify as protected “speech” when there is “[a]n intent to convey a particularized message” and when “the likelihood [i]s great that the message [will] be understood by those

Kober v. Westinghouse Electric Corporation

325 F. Supp. 467 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 29, 1971

and Guidelines that the Commission took no firm position until August 19, 1969, when it revoked former Guidelines appearing in 29 C.F.R. 1604.1(a), (b) and (c) and substituted a new subsection (b) which for the first time clearly … They all involve patterns of segregation established by union contracts or union organizations, which resulted in segregated job classifications.

CARTER v. ALLEGHENY COUNTY JAIL

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 25, 2025

The Sheriff’s Office also raises a qualified immunity defense on behalf of John Doe #1 and John Doe #2. ECF No. 33 at 8-9. … That said, counsel for the Sheriff’s Office has moved to dismiss the Doe Defendants based on a qualified immunity argument. of Soc. Servs. of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658, 690 (1978).

Judkins v. HT Window Fashions Corp.

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

If, as Judkins contends, his priority date is as early as 1990 it is possible that none of the cited references would qualify as prior art. … The court’s claim construction opinion clearly defined the invention of the two patents in suit.

Anderson v. Macy's, Inc.

943 F. Supp. 2d 531 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · May 2, 2013

However, this presumption does not apply where the plaintiff can establish a more personalized connection to the establishment. Id.; Trenton, 2008 WL 4416459 , at *5. … without more, is insufficient to establish standing.”); Kramer v.

Edinboro Company v. United States

224 F. Supp. 301 · District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 25, 1963

However, under the regulations, to qualify for the depreciation of such items the taxpayer must allocate a part of his cost to them, 26 C.F.R. § 1.167 (a)-5. … The government points out also in this case that the taxpayer introduced no evidence as to the duration of the useful life of the tees, greens and other parts of a golf course, and clearly points to Pohlen v.