Aviation Associates, Inc. v. Airline Pilots Ass'n International

holding that a diversity suit cannot be maintained against a partnership one of the partners of which is a United States citizen domiciled abroad | holding that a diversity suit cannot be maintained against a partnership one of the partners of which is a United States citizen domiciled abroad | holding that informal plan under Donovan creat ed only if surrounding circumstances demonstrate creation of de facto pension plan | recognizing that Pennsylvania follows the “classic” M’Naghten test for insanity | “The classic situation where courts deny leave to amend arises when a party files a Rule 15(a) motion after discovery has been completed or the nonmoving party has filed for summary judgment.” | court found SPD and policy did not conflict, but stated that “[i]f the summary booklet had varied from the formal plan, [defendant] may not have been able to enforce [the plan].” | Pearce presumption is inapplicable when “the second sentence is imposed by a different sentencer and the record provides an affirmative assurance that the harsher sentence reflects simply a fresh look at the facts and an independent exercise of discretion”