Case law

Shermoen v. United States

982 F.2d 1312 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 24, 1992

But such is clearly not the case before us; the absent tribes have an indisputable interest in the outcome of appellants' suit, and the Act, which has created that interest, is not so palpably unconstitutional that we could … B. 26 The absent tribes, while necessary, cannot be joined due to their sovereign immunity.

Leon Thomas v. Francisco Quintana

672 F. App'x 657 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 5, 2016

clearly established at the time of the alleged injury such that a reasonable official would understand his actions violated the law. … Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s denial of qualified immunity with respect to Thomas’ allegations related to the denial of a back brace and wheelchair cushion.

Uss-Posco Industries v. Contra Costa County Building & Construction Trades Council

31 F.3d 800 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 26, 1994

Noerr Motor Freight, Inc., 365 U.S. 127, 144 , 81 S.Ct. 523, 533 , 5 L.Ed.2d 464 (1961) (legitimate petitioning of government immunized from antitrust laws). … Had this been sufficient to establish the union's entitlement to the labor exemption, the Court could have stopped right there.

B. Q. v. Alexander Dekok

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 16, 2020

Appellant argues that the district court erred: (1) in determining that Defendant-Appellee Alexander Dekok’s social studies lesson plan did not violate clearly established law; and (2) by ruling on qualified immunity at … We ask two questions when determining whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity: “(1) whether there has been a violation of a constitutional right; and (2) whether that right was clearly established at the time

United States v. Plunk

511 F.3d 918 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 21, 2007

We also held that the government’s admissible evidence failed to establish probable cause for the forfeiture of the SuperCub. Id. at 463-64 . … These factual findings based on conflicting evidence were not clearly erroneous. We affirm the district court’s determination of the property’s value. IV.

Phonetele, Inc. v. American Telephone & Telegraph Company

889 F.2d 224 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 6, 1989

of a regulated entity, some degree of necessity may be established as a matter of fact in individual cases. … . §§ 151— 609, conferred an implied antitrust immunity on the defendants’ activities. Phonetele I, 664 F.2d at 721. 2 .

Maria Medina Tovar v. Laura Zuchowski

982 F.3d 631 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 3, 2020

First, Congress clearly thought about the timing question. … This clearly limits the class of individuals who can qualify for derivative status, but it need not be interpreted as addressing “accompanying, or following to join.”

Dennis Leroy Hamilton v. A.C. Newland, Warden

374 F.3d 822 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 1, 2004

Although the motion was clearly styled as one pursuant to 60(b)(6), the district court treated the motion as a second or successive habeas petition that lacked the required approval of this court. 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (b)(3)( … We nevertheless affirm the district court’s order denying relief because, under traditional 60(b) analysis, Hamilton could not show any “extraordinary circumstance” necessary to qualify for 60(b)(6) relief.

United States v. John Allen Powers William Nichols, Contemnor/appellant

629 F.2d 619 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 6, 1980

Approval of the offer of immunity had been obtained from the Department of Justice. The immunity approved, however, was “use” immunity, not the transactional immunity originally proposed. … Although the district court improperly called the contempt “civil”, Nichols’ attorney was clearly apprised of the nature of the charges against his client.

Timothy Hammer v. Charles Gross Armando Zatarain Newport Beach City, and Linda Delapena, Timothy Hammer v. Charles Gross Armando Zatarain Newport Beach City, Linda Delapena

932 F.2d 842 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 13, 1991

VI 32 Finally, defendants Zatarain and Gross contend that they were entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law. … These defendants are immune from personal liability if reasonable officers in their position, in light of clearly established law, could have believed that the actions they took were lawful. See Anderson v.

Kirstin Lobato v. Lvmpd

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 11, 2023

See id. at 887 (setting forth inquiry for qualified immunity). … ); see also Ziglar, 582 U.S. at 152-55 (holding that the officials were entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established that the intracorporate-conspiracy doctrine does not apply in the context of

Vincent Marquez v. D. Miranda C. Wells, Correctional Officers

12 F.3d 1107 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 6, 1993

Bagley, 988 F.2d 868, 871 (9th Cir.1993). 4 A government official who performs discretionary functions is entitled to qualified immunity "unless the official's conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional … cell search was not clearly established."

Cabrera v. Martin

973 F.2d 735 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 21, 1992

The DOL contends that the Secretary of Labor and the other federal defendants are immune from suit because the United States has not waived its sovereign immunity and is not a “person” subject to liability under 42 U.S.C. … Section 702 now provides a broad waiver of immunity for injunctive actions filed against the federal government.

Federal Trade Commission v. Commerce Planet, Inc.

642 F. App'x 680 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 3, 2016

That the FTC did not provide guidance specifically tailored to Commerce Planet’s activities does not immunize the company from liability. … And the district court did not clearly err in finding that consumers were likely to be deceived.

Dichter-Mad Family Partners v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 28, 2013

Under Gaubert, Plaintiffs’ “practices” are clearly an inadequate basis 26 for showing a mandatory SEC duty. 14 27 Technically, Doe v. … Wells Fargo Express Co., 556 F.2d 406, 430-31, n. 24 (9th Cir. 10 1977)). 11 In the FTCA immunity context, “[i]t is well-established that ‘the 12 burden is on the party seeking to conduct additional discovery to

Clarence Howard v. J. Nunley

465 F. App'x 669 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 9, 2012

Gomez, 298 F.3d 898, 901 (9th Cir. 2002) (qualified immunity). We affirm. … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232 (2009) (“Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right.”); see also Whitley v.

Masayesva v. Hale

118 F.3d 1371 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 8, 1997

The court did not clearly err. … The evidence clearly established that the market for most of the corn was in the nature of personal consumption, and only a small percentage of the crops were sold commercially.

Rutledge v. Arizona Board of Regents

660 F.2d 1345 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 12, 1981

ELEVENTH AMENDMENT IMMUNITY The district court held that the appellant had established diversity jurisdiction in that at the time the action was commenced appellant was a citizen of Nevada while the appellees were citizens … Such liability, if established, would rest solely upon his position as an official of Arizona State University.

Intel Corp. & Consolidated Subsidiaries v. Commissioner

67 F.3d 1445 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 16, 1995

To qualify as a DISC, I.R.C. § 992(a)(1)(A) (1982) required that “95 percent or more of the gross receipts of such corporation consist of qualified export receipts.” … Section 994 provides rules for determining the taxable income of a DISC with respect to qualified sales and leases of export property and qualified services.

Employers Reinsurance Corp. v. Karussos

65 F.3d 796 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 13, 1995

Thus, the Hunger-ford rule is clearly applicable to insurance disputes such as the one before us. III. … Such an inadvertent omission, however, neither immunizes the district court’s assumption of jurisdiction from appellate review nor requires us automatically to remand for consideration of the jurisdictional question.