Cases

MEMORANDUM OPINION CONTI, Chief Judge. In this civil action, plaintiff Robert Vogel (“Vogel” or “plaintiff’), a former employee of the Pittsburgh Public School District (“PPSD” or the “District”), alleges that he was subjected to unlawful age-related discrimination and retaliation in connection with two adverse ratings which he received relative to the 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 school years. Because

Justice BAER, concurring. I join the finely crafted majority opinion in its entirety. I write separately because I can envision a scenario where a personal injury victim is able to prove that the $500,000 statutory cap on damages, which has not been increased since its enactment in 1978, violates the right to a jury trial as guaranteed by Article I, Section 6 of the Pennsylvania Constitution. The majority ho

702 F.Supp.2d 561 (2010) Dr. Dwight MOSLEY, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF PITTSBURGH PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT and City of Pittsburgh Board of Public Education, Defendants. Civil Action No. 07-1560. United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania. March 29, 2010. *563 Avrum Levicoff, Joshua N. Perlman, Levicoff, Silko & Deemer, Pittsbur

OPINION ROTH, Circuit Judge. This is an appeal from a September 30, 1999, District Court decision which granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants, the Pittsburgh Board of Public Education, et. al. Appellants are members of a class of veterans who are pursuing a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The veterans allege that the Board failed to provide them with a proper hiring preference un

OPINION BY President Judge PELLEGRINI. Career Connections Charter High School (Career Connections) petitions for review of an order of the Pennsylvania State Charter School Appeal Board (CAB) affirming the decision of the Board of Pub-*739lie Education of the School District of Pittsburgh (District) which declined to renew Career Connections’ charter

OPINION BY Judge MARY HANNAH LEAVITT. The School District of Pittsburgh petitions for review-of an. adjudication of the State Charter School. Appeal Board (Appeal Board) granting a charter to Provident Charter School for Children with Dyslexia (Provident). In doing so, the Appeal Board concluded that Provident’s application for a charter met the requirements of the Charter School Law4

OPINION MANDERINO, Justice. On December 1, 1975, a teachers’ strike began in the School District of Pittsburgh. About three weeks later, on December 22, 1975, appellee, School District of Pittsburgh, filed a complaint in equity requesting that a preliminary injunction be issued enjoining appellants, Pittsburgh Federation of Teachers, Local 400, American Federation of Teach

536 F.Supp.2d 564 (2008) J.N., by his parents, Plaintiff, v. PITTSBURGH CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant. Civil Action No. 06-1708. United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania. January 25, 2008. *565 Pamela E. Berger, Wienand & Begin, Pittsburgh, PA, for Plaintiff. Jocelyn P. Kramer, Law Offices of Ira Weiss, Robert

OPINION BY Senior Judge FRIEDMAN. James Horvath appeals from the September 4, 2012, order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County (trial court) that affirmed the adjudication of the Board of Education of the Pittsburgh Public Schools (Board). The Board determined that because Horvath rejected an “appropriate offer of reinstatement,” he lost his seniority rights for purposes of recall. We affirm.

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Propel Charter Schools, : Petitioner : : v. : : Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, : Department of Education; State Charter : School Appeal Board; Pittsburgh Public : Schools, : No. 710 M.D. 2019 Respondents : Argued:

MEMORANDUM OPINION CONTI, District Judge. I. Introduction Pending before the court is a motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 41) filed by defendant Pittsburgh Public Schools (“PPS” or the “district”) and a motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 44) filed by defendant Pittsburgh Federation of Teachers (“PFT” or collectively with PPS, “defendants”). Plaintiff Emily Davis

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MARGDA PIERRE-NOEL, on behalf of her minor child K.N., Plaintiff, v. Case No. 1:23-cv-00070 (TNM) BRIDGES PUBLIC CHARTER SCHOOL, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION This case is about who must ensure that a disabled ch

OPINION BY JUDGE COVEY Reading School District (District) petitions this Court for review of the Pennsylvania State Charter School Appeal Board's (CAB) December 20, 2017 order granting I-Lead Charter School's (I-Lead) appeal from the District's decision revoking I-Lead's charter, and directing the District to sign the charter. The District presents the following issues for this Court's

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 19-2167 SHAEL NORRIS, on behalf of her minor child A.M., Plaintiff, Appellee, v. CAPE ELIZABETH SCHOOL DISTRICT; DONNA WOLFROM, Superintendent of Cape Elizabeth Schools; JEFFREY SHEDD, Principal of Cape Elizabeth High School; NATHAN CARPENTER, Vice Principal of Cape Elizabeth High School,

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _______________________ No. 20-2084 _______________________ T.R., a minor, individually, by and through her parent, Barbara Galarza, and on behalf of all others similarly situated; BARBARA GALARZA, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated; A.G., a minor, individually, by and

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ROBERT WILLIS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 14-cv-1746 (KBJ) ) VINCE

OPINION BY Judge PATRICIA A. McCULLOUGH. This case of first impression addresses whether privileged or confidential communications between sexual assault counselors and their patients or clients are admissible as evidence in child abuse ex-pungement proceedings. Pittsburgh Action Against Rape (PAAR) petitions for review of the May 27, 2014 oral ruling from an administrative law judge (ALJ) denying its motion

MEMORANDUM MALACHY E. MANNION, United States District Judge Plaintiff Gwendolyn Damiano was a principal at the Robert Morris Elementary School (“RMES”) in the Scranton School District (“SSD”)- from August 2009 until April 2013. SSD administrators conducted a meeting with plaintiff on April 30, 2013, regarding her performance. She was demoted from principal of RMES and reassigned, at the same pa

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT __________ No. 19-1842 __________ B.L., a minor, by and through her father LAWRENCE LEVY and her mother BETTY LOU LEVY v. MAHANOY AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT, Appellant

MEMORANDUM MATTHEW W. BRANN, District Judge Pending before this Court is a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint filed by all *289Defendants. The motion seeks to dismiss all claims asserted in the Complaint, including Plaintiffs claims for procedural due process, substantive due process, equal protection, and breach of contract, as well as her req