Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
0.70s
978 F.2d 493 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 21, 1992
questions of substantive federal law at the very outset, and hence clearly ‘arises under’ federal law, as that term is used in Art. … From this we assume that the court did not rely on treaties or international law to provide the cause of action, only to establish federal jurisdiction.
Cited 105 timesPublishedFrank Cerrato v. San Francisco Community College District
26 F.3d 968 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 16, 1994
This advisory committee declared all three candidates to be qualified. The members of the advisory committee also testified that race was not considered in the ranking process. … Finally, the defendants introduced evidence showing why Tom was in fact the better qualified candidate for the job.
Cited 190 timesPublishedUnited States v. Park Place Association
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 22, 2009
We think the answer is clearly the latter. … Thus, Park Place’s claim clearly does “not exist independent of the . . . [c]ontract.” Id.
Cited 0 timesPublishedFrederick Bates v. City of San Jose
359 F. App'x 771 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 20, 2009
Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability so long as “a reasonable officer could have believed, in light of the clearly established law, that his conduct was lawful.” Saucier v. … Given the lack of established standards over how to determine when retirement is due to psychological disability, Amoroso’s mistake of fact is insufficient to deny her qualified immunity.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 12, 2026
Barbari argues that she is entitled to qualified immunity, which would prevent a retrial. Even assuming that Barbari preserved her qualified immunity defense, it fails on the merits. … Because a reasonable jury could find that Barbari violated Porio’s rights, and because the right was clearly established, Barbari is not entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedIntel 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.
Cited 1 timesPublished117 F. App'x 613 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 20, 2004
district court properly held that Bartnofs conclusory allegations that Los Angeles County investigator Ed Messinger conspired with others to obtain an improper search warrant failed to undermine the warrant’s validity and establish … Because Messinger did not violate a constitutional right, the district court properly concluded that he was entitled to qualified immunity. See Jackson v.
Cited 0 timesPublished159 F.3d 1194 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 3, 1998
Rather, the APA prescribes standards for judicial review of an agency action, once jurisdiction is otherwise established. See Staacke v. … However, the APA’s waiver of sovereign immunity contains several limitations.
Cited 73 timesPublishedUnited States v. Jose A. Alonso
48 F.3d 1536 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 2, 1995
It is well established that an expert may not state his opinion about the defendant’s guilt. See United States v. … — brief and vague as the affidavit may be — was not clearly erroneous.
Cited 102 timesPublished63 F.3d 906 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 22, 1995
BACKGROUND 4 SEE was established in 1976 as a pilot program pursuant to the Older American Act. … No. 555, 103d Cong., 2d Sess. 55 (1994). 23 The text of the EPAA, together with the committee reports to the EPA appropriations bills, clearly indicate Congress' intent to limit the explicit waiver of sovereign immunity for
Cited 0 timesPublishedStanley Clarke v. City of Madera
370 F. App'x 824 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 10, 2010
’s clearly established rights. … Ct. 808, 815, 818 (2009) (explaining that government officials are entitled to qualified immunity if their conduct does not violate a clearly established federal statutory or constitutional right, and holding that courts
Cited 0 timesUnpublished570 F.3d 1096 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 22, 2009
immunity. … It is well established that “[ejvery repetition of the defamation is a publication in itself,” whether or not the person repeating the defamation attributes it to its source. Prosser & Keaton § 113, at 799.
Cited 224 timesPublished879 F.2d 572 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 27, 1989
This allegation states a claim for relief under section 1983 and, if meritorious, is not one for which the officers would enjoy the qualified immunity accorded to government officials under Harlow v. … municipal policy). 50 Because the district court erroneously believed that a "single incident" constituting a deprivation of Tanner's constitutional rights would be "clearly insufficient" to demonstrate an established policy
Cited 0 timesPublishedTheo. H. Davies & Co., Ltd. v. Republic Of The Marshall Islands
174 F.3d 969 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 23, 1999
Immunities Act ("FSIA"). 12 Theo. … Does the conduct the action is based upon or related to qualify as a "commercial activity"? 25 2.
Cited 2 timesPublishedBenjamin Flournoy, Jr. v. Larry Small
681 F.3d 1000 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 30, 2012
For the purposes of AEDPA review, clearly established federal law is determined by Supreme Court hold- ings at the time the state court decision became final. See Wil- liams v. … Even today there does not appear to be clearly established federal law that would make the admission of Rogala’s testi- mony unreasonable under the standard set under AEDPA.
Cited 38 timesPublished122 F.4th 787 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 2, 2024
Nevada, 945 F.3d 1088, 1092 (9th Cir. 2019) (sovereign immunity). I. … Certain conduct is either clearly proscribed by the statute, such as providing transportation and shelter to minors seeking abortions in other states; clearly not proscribed by the statute, such as soliciting donations to
Cited 22 timesPublishedTahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency
911 F.2d 1331 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 9, 1990
Facts This case involves a challenge by 365 property owners on the Nevada side of the Lake Tahoe basin who claim that the ban on development established by Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (“TRPA”) 1 Ordinance 81-5 (enacted … In any event, the reasonableness of the delay and the diligence of the government’s efforts are clearly questions of fact that cannot be resolved at this point in the proceedings.
Cited 20 timesPublishedCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 9, 2021
“Once the defense of qualified immunity is raised by the defendant, the plaintiff bears the burden of showing that the rights allegedly violated were ‘clearly established.’” LSO, Ltd. v. … Qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedApolinar Navarette, Jr., AKA Paul Medel Navarette v. Jiro J. Enomoto
536 F.2d 277 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 29, 1976
True, the existence of a public officer’s “good faith” immunity from § 1983 liability has been recognized in a number of situations. See Wood v. … Strickland, supra, the Supreme Court concluded that § 1983 should be construed to accord school board members a qualified good faith immunity from damages under that section where “common-law tradition” and “strong public-policy
Reversed on other grounds by Procunier v. Navarette, 434 U.S. 555 (1978)Cited 38 timesPublishedDe Modena v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc.
743 F.2d 1388 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 2, 1984
THE TIE-IN CLAIM To establish a tying claim, a plaintiff must first demonstrate that the defendant is selling two distinct products as a package. … This record, however, is not nearly sufficient to demonstrate that the operation of these state laws immunizes appel-lees’ conduct under the standard for antitrust immunity set forth in California Retail Liquor Dealer’s Ass'n
Cited 5 timesPublished
Ask Donna