Case law

Arizona Public Service Co. v. Aspaas

77 F.3d 1128 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 7, 1995

Indian tribes may not be sued absent an express and unequivocal waiver of immunity by the tribe or abrogation of tribal immunity of Congress. See Burlington Northern R.R. Co. v. … National Fanners establishes a prudential rule of exhaustion that has been satisfied in this case.

Aminoil U. S. A., Inc. v. California State Water Resources Control Board

674 F.2d 1227 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 2, 1982

This provision is clearly inapplicable. While we have held that section 702 waives the sovereign immunity of the United States for non-monetary claims against the government, Hill v. … There is no clear indication of intent to waive immunity in this ease.

Figaro v. City of San Luis Obispo

130 F. App'x 859 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 28, 2005

The district court entered judgment as a matter of law in the officer defendants’ favor and against plaintiffs on the basis of the officer defendants’ qualified immunity. … immunity.

United States v. Timothy Dean Smith

390 F.3d 661 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 3, 2004

Although the court may not inquire into the underlying facts of the conviction, Bonat, 106 F.3d at 1475 , it may examine “documentation or judicially noticeable facts that clearly establish that the conviction is a predicate … As applied to this case, the factual basis stated by the prosecutor clearly establishes that Smith “unlawfully entered an inhabited dwelling,” and Smith conceded this fact through his counsel, who did not object when asked

Nelson v. California Department of Corrections

76 F. App'x 130 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 17, 2003

The district court properly found that defendants Nunez and Melching were entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established that either appeals coordinator was constitutionally required to take different

James J. Kuntz, Individually and as Husband Jennifer Kuntz, Individually and as Wife Courtney Lian Kuntz, Minor Child Leighton Wayne Kuntz, a Minor Child Madeleine Ruth Kuntz, a Minor Child Margeau Ellen Kuntz, a Minor Child Evan James Kuntz, a Minor Child v. Lamar Corporation Lamar Company Llc, a Limited Liability Company D/B/A Lamar Corporation, and Kootenai Electric Cooperative Inc, a Corporation D/B/A a Cooperative Marketing Association, James J. Kuntz, Individually and as Husband Jennifer Kuntz, Individually and as Wife Courtney Lian Kuntz, Minor Child Leighton Wayne Kuntz, a Minor Child Madeleine Ruth Kuntz, a Minor Child Margeau Ellen Kuntz, a Minor Child Evan James Kuntz, a Minor Child v. Lamar Corporation Kootenai Electric Cooperative Inc, a Corporation D/B/A a Cooperative Marketing Association Lamar Company Llc, a Limited Liability Company D/B/A Lamar Corporation

385 F.3d 1177 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 24, 2004

But Alabama Power was not a tort case, and its reasoning is clearly of no assistance to the Cooperative here. … In Lewis , we held that a Federal Reserve Bank, which had been recognized as a federal instrumentality for purposes of immunity from state taxation, did not qualify as a federal instrumentality under the narrower analysis

Southeast Legal Defense Group v. Adams

657 F.2d 1118 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 1, 1981

We affirm the district court ruling. 24 To qualify for an award under the equitable common fund or common benefit doctrine, the successful litigant must either impart a substantial nonmonetary benefit or create or preserve … And clearly Congress was not limited to awarding fees only when a constitutional or civil rights claim is actually decided.

Korab v. Fink

797 F.3d 572 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 1, 2014

divergent naturalization laws, which allowed an alien ineligible for citizenship in one state to move to another state, obtain citizenship, and return to the original state as a citizen entitled to all of its privileges and immunities … The dissent that our reference to Congress’s clearly expressed will demonstrates our "confusion as to whether this an equal protection or a preemption case.” Dissent at 605 n. 7. We are not confused.

Gonzalez v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority

174 F.3d 1016 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 14, 1999

Qualified immunity. … Accordingly, we need not decide whether, for example, the damages claims would fail because of qualified immunity.

Compania Mexicana De Aviacion, S.A. v. United States District Court For The Central District Of California

859 F.2d 1354 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 17, 1988

Cohen, 337 U.S. at 546-547 , 69 S.Ct. at 1225-1226 . 10 A denial of a motion to dismiss based on a claim of absolute or qualified immunity of a public official is an appealable interlocutory order to the extent that it turns … "The considerations that argue for allowing the denial of a public official's qualified immunity to be appealed immediately apply a fortiori to the denial of a foreign government's claim of immunity."

Fiedler v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 30, 2026

Indeed, even the circuit courts that recognize the exception concede that they “cannot conclude that Congress clearly intended for the SIAA’s waiver of sovereign immunity to be subject to an exception for discretionary functions … majority says Thacker is based on the TVA Act’s “sue-and-be-sued” language, the Court’s textual reasoning applies with even greater force here because no one argues that SIAA’s straightforward language contains similar established

Seven Up Pete Venture v. Schweitzer

523 F.3d 948 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 21, 2008

Thus, reverse condemnation actions cannot qualify as claims for prospective relief, and Ex parte Young consequently does not apply. … First English, 482 U.S. at 316 n. 9, 107 S.Ct. 2378 ("The Solicitor General urges that the prohibitory nature of the Fifth Amendment, combined with principles of sovereign immunity, establishes that the Amendment itself is

Rickards v. Canine Eye Registration FounDation, Inc.

783 F.2d 1329 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 27, 1986

While the mere expression of anticompetitive intent is insufficient to establish a section 1 claim, the record establishes acts committed in furtherance of the conspiracy. … The district court’s damage award was not clearly erroneous. D.

97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9274, 97 Daily Journal D.A.R. 14,953 A.J. Neal v. Edwin Shimoda, Administrator, Correctional Facilities Guy Hall, Administrator, Correctional Facilities Richard Mello, Case Manager, Halawa Correctional Facility Barry Coyne, Administrator, Sex Offender Treatment Program, Halawa Correctional Facility John Does 1-10 Doe Entities 1-10 State of Hawaii, Marshall Martinez v. Shelley Nobriga, H.C.F., Classification Coordinator George Sumner, Dir., Dept. Of Public Safety Edwin Shimoda, Div. Administrator of H.C.F. John Smythe, Administrator for H.C.F., in Their Individual and Official Capacities

131 F.3d 818 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 11, 1997

State officials sued in their individual capacity are entitled to qualified immunity to the extent that their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights. Harlow v. … Qualified immunity extends to prison officials. Procunier v. Navarette, 434 U.S. 555 , 98 S.Ct. 855 , 55 L.Ed.2d 24 (1978).

Columbia Steel Casting Co., Inc., an Oregon Corporation v. Portland General Electric Company, an Oregon Corporation, Columbia Steel Casting Co., Inc., an Oregon Corporation v. Portland General Electric Company, an Oregon Corporation Public Utility Commission of the State of Oregon

103 F.3d 1446 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 27, 1996

by forming an intent that is not expressed forthrightly and clearly. … Rather, the state-action immunity question is one of law that turns on whether the displacement of competition with monopolies in the Portland market was "clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed as state policy,"

AL-KIDD v. Ashcroft

653 F.3d 982 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 18, 2010

In doing so, we determined Ashcroft was not entitled to absolute or qualified immunity because he served an investigative function in con- nection with the challenged policy, which violated al-Kidd’s clearly established constitutional … City of Anaheim, 343 F.3d 1052, 1060 (9th Cir. 2003) (“[I]n the absence of binding pre- cedent, a court should look to whatever decisional law is available to ascertain whether the law is clearly established for qualified

Henderson Duval Houghton v. Glenn Osborne, Frank Tuss, H. William Coder, Joel G. Roth and Gladys M. Vance

834 F.2d 745 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 14, 1987

He also recommended that the claims against Tuss and Osborne be dismissed because Houghton had failed to establish any constitutional violation in the application of the jail clothing policy to him. … A judge of the court may reconsider any pretrial matter under this subparagraph (A) where it has been shown that the magistrate’s order is clearly erroneous or contrary to law.

Campbell v. Herrera

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 29, 2025

“Law is clearly established for the purposes of qualified immunity if every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates the right at issue.” Wilk, 956 F.3d at 1148 (cleaned up). … * * * The majority correctly notes that “whether a right is clearly established” for Eighth Amendment qualified immunity purposes is set forth in Estate of Ford, 301 F.3d at

Williams v. Ramsey

190 F. App'x 530 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 30, 2006

MEMORANDUM ** Paul Williams and Daylyn Presley appeal the district court’s summary judgment on qualified immunity in their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging violation of their Fourth Amendment rights. … As the April affidavit established probable cause to conduct the searches at issue in this case even without the allegedly false information in that affidavit, the officers are entitled qualified immunity. AFFIRMED.

Chadd Ex Rel. Estate of Boardman v. United States

794 F.3d 1104 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 27, 2015

II As a sovereign, the United States is immune from suit unless it waives such immunity. FDIC v. Meyer, 510 U.S. 471, 475 , 114 S.Ct. 996 , 127 L.Ed.2d 308 (1994). … However, the manual qualifies this obligation in the following manner: “The Service will do this within the constraints of the 1916 Organic Act.