Case law

Skokomish Indian Tribe, a Federally Recognized Indian Tribe in Its Own Capacity as a Class Representative and as Parens Patriae Denny S. Hurtado Gordon A. James Joseph Pavel Anne Pavel Maures P. Tinaza Celeste F. Vigil Roslynne L. Reed Gary W. Peterson Rita C. Andrews Tom G. Strong Marie E. Gouley Victoria J. Pavel Dennis W. Allen Joseph Andrews, Sr. Zetha Cush Elsie M. Allen Alex L. Gouley, Jr. Lawrence L. Kenyon Doris Miller Gerald B. Miller Helen M. Rudy Ronald D. Twiddy, Sr. Nick G. Wilbur, Sr. v. United States of America Tacoma Public Utilities, a Washington Municipal Corporation City of Tacoma, a Washington Municipal Corporation William Barker, Tacoma Public Utilities Board Member in His Official Capacity Tom Hilyard, Tacoma Public Utilities Board Member in His Official Capacity Robert Lane Tim Strege G.E. Vaughn, Skokomish Indian Tribe, a Federally Recognized Indian Tribe in Its Own Capacity as a Class Representative and as Parens Patriae Denny S. Hurtado Gordon A. James Joseph Pavel Anne Pavel Maures P. Tinaza Celeste F. Vigil Roslynne L. Reed Gary W. Peterson Rita C. Andrews Tom G. Strong Marie E. Gouley Victoria J. Pavel Dennis W. Allen Joseph Andrews, Sr. Zetha Cush Elsie M. Allen Alex L. Gouley, Jr. Lawrence L. Kenyon Doris Miller Gerald B. Miller Helen M. Rudy Ronald D. Twiddy, Sr. Nick G. Wilbur, Sr., Skokomish Indian Tribal Members for Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Tacoma Public Utilities, a Washington Municipal Corporation City of Tacoma, a Washington Municipal Corporation William Barker, Tacoma Public Utilities Board Member in His Official Capacity Tom Hilyard, Tacoma Public Utilities Board Member in His Official Capacity Robert Lane Tim Strege G.E. Vaughn United States Internal Revenue Service

410 F.3d 506 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 3, 2005

No special immunity premised on sovereignty as such is claimed. … Ordinarily, whether a case is cognizable under § 1983 does not turn on whether the rights are well-established or not, although qualified immunity does turn upon that consideration. See Saucier v.

The Chippewa Cree Tribe v. Usdoi

900 F.3d 1152 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 21, 2018

To qualify as an “employee,” ARRA requires only that “an individual perform[] services on behalf of an employer.” § 1553(g)(3)(A), 123 Stat. at 301. … The Tribe seems to assume that this timing immunizes it because any prohibited reprisal would have to have taken  CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE V.

Walters v. Reno

145 F.3d 1032 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 18, 1998

A district court’s factual findings are entitled to deference unless they are clearly erroneous. Id. … Further, we note that parole for the purpose of remedying a constitutional violation clearly works a “significant public benefit.”

Trustees of the Southern California Bakery Drivers Security Fund Dirk Geersen v. Rick Middleton Bob Doss Ronn English Perri Newell South Bay Teamsters and Employers Health and Welfare and Related Benefits Trust Fund, Trustees of the Southern California Bakery Drivers Security Fund Dirk Geersen v. Rick Middleton Bob Doss Ronn English Perri Newell South Bay Teamsters and Employers Health and Welfare and Related Benefits Trust Fund

474 F.3d 642 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 18, 2007

In light of our reversal of summary judgment as to the ERISA fiduciary duty claim, we find that the district court's determination was clearly erroneous. … The district court granted summary judgment for South Bay Teamsters on this claim because Bakery Drivers could not establish standing as co-fiduciaries or participants.

United States v. Oregon

769 F.2d 1410 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 29, 1985

The Plan set conservation goals for each fish species, established certain fishing regulations, and provided for the establishment of future management techniques. … Oregon, 657 F.2d 1009 , 1012 n. 7 (9th Cir.1981) (appeal of injunction not moot after fishing season expired where immunity and jurisdictional issues will likely occur again).

United States v. Pelisamen

641 F.3d 399 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 13, 2011

Arriola added Defendant as a signatory to this new account shortly after it was established. … Evid. 801, 802, and that it did not qualify under the business records exception to the hearsay rule, see Fed. R.

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

884 F.2d 1200 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 6, 1989

They argue that neither the officer's actions nor the City policy regarding the use of force were unconstitutional and that, in any event, the individual officers were entitled to qualified immunity. … immunity, raised by the appellants

Aaron Anderson v. Connie Gipson

902 F.3d 1126 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 6, 2018

established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court, (2) involved an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court, or (3) was based on an unreasonable determination … A decision is contrary to clearly established Supreme Court law if it “applies a rule that contradicts the governing law set forth in [Supreme Court] cases.” Early v.

United States v. Lopez-Salas

254 F. App'x 621 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 15, 2007

A district court’s application of the section 3Bl.l(c) *624 two-level adjustment is not clearly erroneous where a defendant ,tells others when to take certain actions, what to deliver, and where to deliver it. … The dispute here is whether Thompson’s 2002 riot conviction qualifies as a crime of violence.

Windward Partners, a Registered Hawaii Partnership v. George Ariyoshi, Governor of the State of Hawaii

693 F.2d 928 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 1, 1982

with the judge even though the state official was immune. … Thus, the dismissal below cannot be treated as a conclusion of state law reviewable under a clearly wrong deferential standard. E.g., Major v. Arizona State Prison, 642 F.2d 311, 313 (9th Cir.1981); Anderson v.

Wenqin Sun v. Mukasey

555 F.3d 802 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 9, 2009

The interview notice is clearly dated January 26, 2006, and sets an interview date of February 14, 2006. … Sun qualifies for equitable tolling, and the BIA must act upon her application for adjustment of status. Petition GRANTED.

Amerocean Steamship Company v. Copp

245 F.2d 291 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 26, 1957

Any vestiges of immunity from liability for negligent acts towards outsiders who are not seamen have disappeared. 5 Even as to seamen, negligent acts which result in a condition of unseaworthiness will evoke liability. 8 … This doctrine is well established at common law and is followed in admiralty.

Steven McClam, II v. Franz Verhelst

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 7, 2022

s clearly established constitutional rights. … to qualified immunity.

Skranak v. Castenada

425 F.3d 1213 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 11, 2005

The Quiet Title Act is a waiver of sovereign immunity. If the statute of limitations has run on a waiver of sovereign immunity, federal courts lack jurisdiction. Block v. … United States, 255 F.3d 787, 794 (9th Cir. 2001) (“Adams II”) (explaining that “Adams I clearly stated that . . . common law claims are preempted by ANILCA”).

Henry v. Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Walldesign, Inc. (In Re Walldesign, Inc.)

872 F.3d 954 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 2, 2017

Henry qualify as “initial transferees” under § 550(a)(1). C. Under the Dominion Test, the Bureshes and Ms. Henry Qualify as “Initial Transferees.” As explained below, the Bureshes and Ms. … Only after establishing this baseline understanding, which runs directly counter to the Buresh-es’ and Ms.

Gary Davis v. Hsbc Bank Nevada, N.A.

691 F.3d 1152 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 31, 2012

Even if TILA does not govern Best Buy, which we need not decide, Davis’s argument misses the mark because the safe harbor doctrine immunizes conduct, not enti- ties. … Thus, to qualify for a safe harbor, we must be satisfied that the omission of the annual fee is permitted by some statute or reg- ulation.

Grady Carroll Ouzts v. Maryland National Insurance Company

505 F.2d 547 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 29, 1974

It seems clear, however, that the reason underlying the ruling was that no federal cause of action was established. The court also dismissed the pendent state law claim. … A panel of this court unanimously affirmed upon the ground that the appellant had not established a cause of action under federal law.

Fletcher Casey, Jr., on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Samuel A. Lewis, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections

4 F.3d 1516 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 23, 1993

Tribble, 860 F.2d at 325-27 (although digital rectal search may be justified by security concerns, defendants' motion for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity was properly denied where evidence demonstrated … For example, in Tribble, 860 F.2d at 327 , we affirmed the denial of qualified immunity where prison officials asserted "security" concerns as basis for digital rectal search, but the prisoner submitted evidence to establish

Wendell O. Meeks v. James H. Gomez Eddie Myers, Warden Dr. Blair

107 F.3d 16 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 6, 1997

The court also denied defendants' second motion for summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds, reasoning that the factual dispute as to deliberate indifference precluded it from granting summary judgment on qualified … immunity.

Clinton H. Mitchell and Clinton Mitchell Foundation v. R. A. Riddell, District Director of Internal Revenue, and United States of America

402 F.2d 842 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 1, 1969

Mitchell, on January 1, 1963, established an inter vivos trust, retaining management in himself. The name or designation of the trust is not mentioned in the complaint. … Sherwood, 312 U.S. 584, 586 , 61 S.Ct. 767, 769 , 85 L.Ed. 1058 (1941): “The United States, as sovereign, is immune from suit save as it consents to be sued, United States v.