Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
61 results for '* judge:"Judge Krause"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2023-09-11
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Education
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Circuit Judge Krause
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-2013
District court erred in dismissing students' complaint for refund of tuition and fees after their universities transitioned to fully remote instruction in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, where students had plausibly alleged that they had an implied contract for on-campus programming in exchange for their tuition and fees. Orders of the district court affirmed in part and reversed and remanded in part.
Publication Date: 2023-08-28
Practice Area: Health Care Law
Industry:
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Krause
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-1035
Relators appealed the district court's dismissal of their False Claims Act lawsuit.
Publication Date: 2023-08-21
Practice Area: Education Law
Industry: Education
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Krause
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Gary F. Lynch, Lynch Carpenter, Pittsburgh, PA; Jeffrey A. Klafter, Seth R. Lesser, Klafter Lesser, Rye Brook, NY; Eric Poulin, Poulin, Willey & Anastopoulo, Charleston, SC; Roy T. Willey, IV, Anastopoulo Law Firm, Charleston, SC; Stuart A. Carpey, Plymouth Meeting, PA; Edward W. Ciolko, Nicholas Colella, Jamisen A. Etzel, Gary F. Lynch, Lynch Carpenter, Pittsburgh, PA for appellants.
for defendant: James C. Martin, Colin E. Wrabley, Reed Smith, Pittsburgh, PA; Gerard A. Dever, Roberta D. Liebenberg, Fine Kaplan & Black, Philadelphia, PA; Burt M. Rublin, Ballard Spahr, Philadelphia, PA for appellees.
Case Number: 21-2013
College students plausibly stated breach of implied contract claim from universities' switch to online learning due to COVID-19 pandemic where marketing materials emphasized benefits of on-campus instruction from attending each university.
Publication Date: 2023-07-10
Practice Area: Civil Rights
Industry: Federal Government
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Krause
Attorneys: For plaintiff: David Rudovsky, Jonathan H. Feinberg, Susan M. Lin Kairys, Rudovsky, Messing, Feinberg & Lin LLP, Philadelphia, PA; Patrick Toomey, Ashley Gorski, Sarah Taitz, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, New York, NY; Jonathan Hafetz, Seton Hall Law School, Newark, NJ for appellants.
for defendant: Leif Overvold, Brian M. Boynton, H. Thomas Byron III, Sharon Swingle, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC for appellees.
Case Number: 21-2798
"Clearly established" threshold inapplicable to discretionary function exception analysis under FTCA because the government lacked discretion to violate constitutional rights.
Publication Date: 2023-06-19
Practice Area: Personal Injury
Industry: Federal Government
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Circuit Judge Krause
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-2798
District court properly dismissed appellant's Bivens claims and his fifth amendment Federal Tort Claims Act claim but erred in dismissing appellant's fourth amendment FTCA claim, in action over his arrest for allegedly providing Chinese authorities with sensitive information about super conductor technology, because appellant's fourth and fifth amendment claims arose in a new context and implicated special factors involving national security but fourth amendment FTCA complaint listed discrete instances of agent's knowing provision of
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors:
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2023-05-22
Practice Area: Criminal Law
Industry: Federal Government
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Circuit Judge Krause
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-3281
District court did not err in relying on appellant's $325 million in intended losses from his tax fraud scheme to calculate his base offense level because sentencing guideline §2T1.4 encompassed both actual and intended losses. Affirmed.
Publication Date: 2022-12-13
Practice Area: Criminal Law
Industry:
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Krause
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-1084
The court affirmed the judgment of the district court denying appellant's motion for compassionate release.
Publication Date: 2022-11-08
Practice Area: Criminal Law
Industry:
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Krause
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-2114
Counsel moved to withdraw from representing defendant on appeal.
Publication Date: 2022-09-19
Practice Area: Criminal Appeals
Industry:
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Circuit Judge Krause
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 19-2717
Appellant appealed his resentencing under the First Step Act and court found district court erred in finding it did not have the discretion to consider appellant's arguments concerning intervening changes in law affecting his career-offender status and in denying appellant the opportunity to file a memorandum and supplemental documentation to support his arguments. Vacated and remanded.
Publication Date: 2022-09-19
Practice Area: Consumer Protection
Industry: Financial Services and Banking
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Circuit Judge Krause
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-1672
District court erred in denying class certification of the proposed class and subclass in appellant's putative Fair Credit Reporting Act action and court found district court correctly distinguished between consumers who made direct requests under §1681g and consumers who received courtesy copies of property managers' rental report but erred in denying class certification of even the direct request subclass because statute unambiguously provided that any generalized "request" by a consumer triggered a CRA's disclosure obligation under
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read