In Re: Ordering Amending Rules 101 and 1101 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Juvenile Court Procedure

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• reiterating that “substantial harm” may be shown if plaintiff suffers “lifelong handicap, permanent loss, or considerable pain”
• stating that whether prison officials had knowledge of a substantial risk “is a question of fact subject to demonstration in the usual ways, including inference from circumstantial evidence”
• stating that the objective prong can be satisfied by a showing of “considerable pain”
• \[q]ualified immunity does not shield government officials from all discovery but only from discovery which is either avoidable or overly broad\
• “If we determine the district court’s conclusion rests on findings of evidence sufficiency, we must dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.” (quotations omitted)
• \[W]hether a given constitutional or statutory right was clearly established at the time the defendant acted presents a purely legal question.\ (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).