Case law

Rosa Brizuela v. City of Sparks

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 21, 2023

not violate clearly established law.” … As we cannot “define clearly established law at a high level of generality,” Kisela v. Hughes, 138 S.

Community House, Inc. v. City of Boise

490 F.3d 1041 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 7, 2007

To establish such a prima facie case, the plaintiffs must show (1) that they are members of a protected class, (2) that applied for and were qualified for shelter at Community House, (3) that they were rejected, and (4) that … While there may be a lower percentage of disabled persons among the new Community House residents, the district court’s factual finding is not clearly erroneous.

A.G. Ex Rel. Grundemann v. Paradise Valley Unified School District No. 69

815 F.3d 1195 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 3, 2016

The regulations adopted pursuant to section 504 require qualifying public schools to “provide a free appropriate public education to each qualified handicapped person.” … Nov. 8, 2012) (“The Restatement clearly recognizes the application of the eggshell plaintiff rule to claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress.” (citing Restatement (Second) of Torts § 46 cmt. j (Am. Law.

47 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1048, 97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7173, 97 Daily Journal D.A.R. 11,560 United States of America v. Sally Anne Croft, United States of America v. Susan Hagan

124 F.3d 1109 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 5, 1997

immunity to prosecution witnesses. … The transactional immunity they sought would clearly affect the charges against them. The government did not improperly distort the fact-finding process in denying them that immunity. 30 V.

Selamawit Zehatye v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General

453 F.3d 1182 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 13, 2006

An applicant may also qualify for asylum by actually showing a well-founded fear of future persecution, again on account of[one of the five protected grounds]. Deloso v. … of their missionary work, and in some cases clearly have trouble with secular government with regard to their position vis-a-vis military service or as in the case of Eritrea national service....

Sarmad Syed v. M-I, LLC

853 F.3d 492 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 20, 2017

In the qualified immunity context, we have held that “when an officer’s conduct is so patently violative of the constitutional right that reasonable officials would know without guidance from the courts that the action was … unconstitutional, closely analogous pre-existing case law is not required to show that the law is clearly established.”

United States v. Rodriguez-Lopez

51 F. App'x 664 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 19, 2002

INS, 214 F.3d 1128, 1133 (9th Cir.2000), we have interpreted Taylor's edict to include examination of "documentation or judicially noticeable facts that clearly establish that the conviction is a predicate conviction for … "However, if the statute and the judicially noticeable facts would allow the defendant to be convicted of an offense other than that defined as a qualifying offense by the guidelines, then the conviction does not qualify

Cornejo v. County of San Diego

504 F.3d 853 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 24, 2007

Thus, it is § 1983, not the Vienna Convention, that would establish the right to sue. … The Seventh Circuit clearly applied the Gonzaga standard and held that individual rights, once identified in the treaty, were presumptively enforceable under § 1983. See Jogi, 480 F.3d at 827-836 .

United States v. California Mobile Home Park Management Co.

29 F.3d 1413 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 18, 1994

Besides the fact that Sec. 3604's reasonable accommodations requirement contains no exemption for financial costs to the landlord, 1 the history of the FHAA clearly establishes that Congress anticipated that landlords would … There are, of course, many types of residential fees that affect handicapped and non-handicapped residents equally; such fees are clearly proper.

United States v. Rendon-Duarte

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 20, 2007

There, the court stated: [T]he caselaw in this and other circuits establishes clearly the logical connection between a convicted felon’s knowing possession of a firearm at one time and his knowledge that … [8] Because a conviction under the Alaska statute qualifies clearly as a crime of violence under section 4B1.2(a)(2), the district court’s error did not substantially affect Rendon- Duarte’s rights.

James Roy Schlette, by Wanda Roe, Conservator of His Person v. James Burdick

633 F.2d 920 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 10, 1980

The materials supporting the summary judgment motion clearly establish that the Schlette family was well known to the relevant social agencies and that specific investigation of the father’s house would have been redundant … The district court also denied a motion to dismiss by Burdick, Nance, Ingham and Usher on the grounds of quasijudicial immunity. The parties do not raise this issue on appeal, so we need not address the question. 2 .

Smith v. Central Arizona Water Conservation District

418 F.3d 1028 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 10, 2005

The government asserted the farmers' claims were barred by sovereign immunity. Id. at 1142 . … The government had therefore not waived its immunity from suit, and the district court lacked jurisdiction.

United States v. Jorge Cisneros

763 F.3d 1236 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 19, 2014

CISNEROS Court decision “undercut the theory or reasoning underlying the prior circuit precedent in such a way that the cases are clearly irreconcilable.” See Miller, 335 F.3d at 900. … Each indictment establishes that Cisneros was convicted of vehicular flight pursuant to Oregon Revised Statutes section 811.540(1)(b)(A).

Barrows v. Hickel

447 F.2d 80 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 17, 1971

The record clearly establishes that the disputed Grout Creek deposit is a “common varieties” deposit within the meaning of the Act. … To qualify as “valuable mineral deposits” under the “marketability test” it must be shown that the minerals can be “extracted, removed and marketed at a profit.” United States v.

John Melnik v. Romeo Aranas

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 6, 2021

Aranas is entitled to qualified immunity unless (1) the disputed facts taken in the light most favorable to Melnik show that his conduct violated a constitutional right, and (2) the constitutional right was clearly established … Aranas was entitled to qualified immunity. REVERSED and REMANDED. 4

Garcia v. Alameida

185 F. App'x 649 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 19, 2006

The California court’s rejection of this claim was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law. … The California court’s decision to exclude some of Montes’ testimony was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d); Delaware v.

United States v. Chris Parker

241 F.3d 1114 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 1, 2001

The defense case centered heavily around portraying these witnesses as having provided their testimony in exchange for reduced sentences or, in Washington’s case, complete immunity. … This interpretation is at odds with both the plain meaning of the statute and the advisory note, which clearly implies that only actions affirmatively taken to involve a minor in the offense will qualify under § 3B1.4.

James W. Coghlan v. American Seafoods Company LLC

413 F.3d 1090 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 7, 2005

Direct evidence typically consists of clearly sexist, racist, or similarly discriminatory statements or actions by the employer. … Coghlan thus suggests that evidence such as ASC's choice to pass over Coghlan in favor of an allegedly less-qualified Norwegian qualifies as "direct.”

Ackerman v. Gittere

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 8, 2025

Ackerman’s due process and equal protection claims insofar as they preclude Defendants’ qualified immunity defense. … This is because qualified immunity protects government employees from both liability and having to stand trial.

Whitcombe v. United States Department of Treasury

922 F.2d 846 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 10, 1991

IV 11 Whitcombe contends his complaint, affidavits and memoranda clearly indicate that he intended to sue Bergmans in his individual capacity. Even if that were true, Bergmans is entitled to qualified immunity. … Government officials are immune from damage suits "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Harlow v.