§Why CasetextPricing

Kuhns et al v. City of Allentown et al

RESPONSE in Opposition re MOTION for Summary Judgment, 90 Amended MOTION for Summary Judgment

6 Cited authorities

  1. American Mfrs. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Sullivan

    526 U.S. 40 (1999)   Cited 4,814 times
    Holding that the private insurers were not state actors

  2. Kneipp v. Tedder

    95 F.3d 1199 (3d Cir. 1996)   Cited 2,139 times
    Holding that officers increased the risk of harm to a severely intoxicated woman who was struggling to walk home with the assistance of her husband when the officers detained the plaintiff, let her husband leave, then sent the plaintiff to walk home unescorted in near-freezing conditions that resulted in hypothermia and brain damage

  3. Berg v. County of Allegheny

    219 F.3d 261 (3d Cir. 2000)   Cited 1,151 times
    Holding that a reasonable jury could infer from testimony of police officer about system for issuing warrants that system was the product of a decisionmaker

  4. Hampton v. Holmesburg Prison Officials

    546 F.2d 1077 (3d Cir. 1976)   Cited 778 times
    Holding that prison guards who did not intentionally prevent a pretrial detainee from receiving needed medical treatment could not be found deliberately indifferent

  5. Machipongo Land and Coal Co. v. Com

    569 Pa. 3 (Pa. 2002)   Cited 35 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding harm to aquatic habitat alone sufficient to support nuisance finding

  6. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 328,261 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit