Case law

Portillo v. Johnson

94 F. App'x 457 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 15, 2004

McIntosh, 90 F.3d 330, 332 (9th Cir. 1996) (a prisoner can establish deliberate indifference by showing that a delay in treatment was “medically unacceptable”); Lopez v. … We decline to consider whether defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because defendants did not raise this issue below. See Underwood Cotton Co. v.

Ortiz v. Meissner

179 F.3d 718 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 3, 1999

Congress simultaneously sought to aid existing aliens by creating two broad amnesty programs that would enable qualifying aliens to emerge from the shadows, while enacting other provisions to make the plight of non-qualifying … The Court also identified Congress’ purpose in creating the SAW program as improving only the lot of those who qualify for amnesty, not of those who do not qualify and must face lack of work and possible deportation.

Joseph H. Friedrich v. Intel Corporation Intel Corporation Long Term Disability Benefit Plan, Joseph H. Friedrich v. Intel Corporation Intel Corporation Long Term Disability Benefit Plan

181 F.3d 1105 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 29, 1999

After eighteen (18) months of Disability, a Participant must be unable to perform the work of any occupation for which he or she is or becomes reasonably qualified for by training, education or experience. 5 LTD Plan 2.14 … A district court, when exercising de novo review of an ERISA benefits denial decision, may admit additional evidence when " 'circumstances clearly establish that additional evidence is necessary to conduct an adequate de

Lussier v. Dollar Tree Stores

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 6, 2008

The court also pointed out that courts are familiar with determining whether conduct is objectively reasonable in contexts such as qualified immunity, and that Martin’s objectively reasonable standard balances competing interests … in much the same way as the doctrine of qualified immunity does.

In Re Consolidated United States Atmospheric Testing Litigation, Christina Konizeski v. Livermore Labs, Alice P. Broudy v. United States

820 F.2d 982 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 22, 1987

This case is clearly distinguishable. The discretionary function exception was not raised nor discussed. … Although the probability of an epidemic was never established, the public was strongly urged to submit to immunization with little advice respecting its attendant hazards. R.

Charles Farnsworth v. Teddi Armstrong

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 24, 2024

The district court properly granted summary judgment to defendant Nee on the basis of qualified immunity because Farnsworth failed to show that Nee violated any clearly established constitutional right in treating Farnsworth … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232 (2009) (“Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right.”); Foster v.

Oregon Short Line Railroad v. Department of Revenue Oregon

139 F.3d 1259 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 23, 1998

MHC, 66 F.3d at 1090-91 (clearly deciding a similar interest rate issue as a matter of law without expressly saying so). … While we will say a bit more about our reasoning, we essentially disposed of this claim when we held that: The State’s failure to raise an immunity defense before the district court, at a time where it was clearly foreclosed

Blufford Hayes, Jr. v. Jeanne Woodford

301 F.3d 1054 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 26, 2002

.James's statement reads, in pertinent part: "I was granted immunity in the [Hayes] case. I got no immunity for any other case.... … The dissent argues that James's testimony was critical to establish the death-qualifying special circumstance, see infra at 1090; however, Gebert also testified that Hayes told her that he had burglarized Patel's office.

Alvarez v. City of Los Angeles

177 F. App'x 742 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 26, 2006

False Arrest, False Imprisonment, Malicious Prosecution and State Tort Claims The Supreme Court has instructed that qualified immunity shields officers from § 1983 actions where a reasonable officer could conclude, even if … This issue should be resolved early in the litigation because it is an immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability. See id.

United States v. Sideman & Bancroft, LLP

704 F.3d 1197 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 8, 2013

We now consider whether the district court clearly erred in determining that the foregone exception applies here. … The district court’s findings of existence and possession were not clearly erroneous. B.

Reina-Rodriguez v. United States

655 F.3d 1182 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 22, 2011

UNITED STATES [5] Thus, the relevant inquiry is whether the judicially noticeable documents establish that the conviction necessarily includes all of the elements of the qualifying offense. Rosas- Castaneda v. … However, they do not establish that the Utah conviction qualifies as a “burglary of a dwelling.”

United States v. Dennis Guy Clark

218 F.3d 1092 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 17, 2000

In our precedents, we have made clear that several well-established rules of interpretation govern our consideration of the plea agreement in dispute. … Thus, it appears that the term “this investigation” clearly and unambiguously refers to the investigation of the postal robberies, and does not encompass the Salmon burglary.

Jesse Dupris v. Selanhongva McDonald

554 F. App'x 570 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 30, 2014

In determining whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, we apply a two-step analysis: (1) has the plaintiff made out a violation of a constitutional right; and (2) was that right clearly established at the … Here the right not to be arrested without probable cause was clearly established, but Plaintiffs have not shown that the members of the Task Force knew or should have known that they lacked probable cause when Plaintiffs

Yosh Sakamoto v. Duty Free Shoppers, Ltd.

764 F.2d 1285 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 1, 1985

.”); Matter of Baker, 693 F.2d 925, 925-26 (9th Cir.1982) (prior case found not to have established controlling precedent on issue before the court since the question at issue was neither contested nor ruled upon in that … Plaintiffs, however, try to fit this case within the line of Supreme Court cases holding that municipalities, unlike state governments and federal instrumentalities, are not immune unless acting pursuant to clearly articulated

De Witt Long v. Sugai

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 5, 2024

The district court also did not conduct a qualified immunity analysis. … If the court concludes, after conducting the Turner analysis, that the burden was not justified, our remand allows the court to conduct a qualified immunity analysis. 2.

Renee Morgan, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Gary F. Morgan, Deceased v. The United States of America

709 F.2d 580 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 30, 1983

The 1946 agreement establishes a very general obligation on the government to provide a safe recreational area. … In rebuttal, plaintiff submits the affidavit of a qualified electrician who investigated the accident.

Philip Galanti v. Ndoc

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 25, 2023

immunity shields the officer-defendants from liability, and NDOC is not a proper party. … He asserts that Defendants did 3 Relatedly, Defendants argue that the officer-defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because “Nevada law does not provide inmates with a clearly established liberty interest in parole

Yellowstone County, a Political Subdivision of the State of Montana v. Carl Pease

96 F.3d 1169 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 11, 1996

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19, a non-party is “indispensable” to an action if (1) the non-party is “necessary” under Rule 19(a); (2) the non-party cannot be joined (due to sovereign immunity, for example); and … D Finally, assuming arguendo that Montana controls, Pease argues that the district court erred in failing to conclude that Pease’s action qualified under both factors. We disagree.

Cabalce v. Thomas E. Blanchard & Associates, Inc.

797 F.3d 720 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 13, 2015

Derivative Sovereign Immunity Relying on Yearsley v. W.A. Ross Constr. … Neither did VSE establish that the federal government reviewed in detail the destruction plan that had been independently devised by VSE and Donaldson.

Costco Wholesale Corp. v. Maleng

522 F.3d 874 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 1, 2008

As “state regulatory programs [can] not violate [the Sherman Act],” we generally must determine whether a “state’s involvement in [a] price-setting program is sufficient to establish antitrust immunity.” … PacifiCorp, 238 F.3d 1189 , 1192 n. 8 (9th Cir.2001) (“The Court has not clearly defined the relationship between federal antitrust preemption of state laws restricting competition and the state action immunity doctrine.”