Case law

Edwards v. Heckler

789 F.2d 659 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 13, 1985

The Secretary appeals the judgment establishing the new standard and the parties cross-appeal the attorney's fee award. … Whether the unconstitutionality of section 411(a)(5)(A) was “clearly foreshadowed” prior to Frontiero is but one factor.

United States v. Coates

692 F.2d 629 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 18, 1982

The district court applied the legal standard for judicial enforcement of an IRS summons established in United States v. … The district court’s finding that examination of the Church’s corporate minute books is necessary to make a determination of whether the Church still qualifies as a tax exempt religious organization was not clearly erroneous

Overton Thomas Anthony v. C. J. Fitzharris, Superintendent

389 F.2d 657 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 4, 1968

Cabalero very clearly indicated what the nature of the charge was, and stated that: “At your attorney’s request, the Court is granting you permission to withdraw your plea so that you may enter a new and different plea, that … And he was asked whether or not anyone “made any promises of reward, probation, a lesser sentence, immunity, or any advantage whatsoever to be gained by you in pleading guilty?”

Price v. Akaka

928 F.2d 824 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 21, 1991

Clearly, under Sec. 1983, a plaintiff may sue a state officer in his individual capacity for alleged wrongs committed by the officer in his official capacity. … The defendants therefore do not share the state's immunity from this suit

Tony Melendez Longoria v. Robert G. Borg, Warden, and Bernie Aispuro, Warden

28 F.3d 106 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 13, 1994

Qualified immunity protects government officials who perform discretionary functions from civil damages liability if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982). 4 To determine whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, a court must determine (1) whether the right allegedly violated was "clearly established" at the time of the alleged violation

George Richard Walks on Top v. United States

372 F.2d 422 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 7, 1967

The trial judge instructed the jury on this point: “Three essential elements are required to be proved in order to establish the offense charged in the indictment. … As the arrest here was clearly lawful, the trial court was correct in refusing to give these instructions.

Importante v. County of Los Angeles

162 F. App'x 740 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 11, 2006

The level of reliability may be established by averments that an informant has provided reliable tips in the past. See United States v. Shipstead, 433 F.2d 368, 372 (9th Cir.1970). … We, like the district court, do not have occasion to reach the question of whether Detective Gar *744 cia is entitled to qualified immunity for his actions.

Smith v. Central Arizona Water Conservation District

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

[7] We held that the irrigators would not be entitled to enforce the contract unless they could qualify as third-party beneficiaries. Id. at 1210. … WATER CONSERV’N ment had therefore not waived its immunity from suit, and the district court lacked jurisdiction.

Severino Abela v. Ernest Gustafson

888 F.2d 1258 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 6, 1989

into acquiescing to adverse Government action, rather than vindicating their rights, simply by threatening them with costly litigation, Congress enacted the EAJA, waiving the United States’ sovereign and general statutory immunity … It argued only that the evidence of many of the petitioners was insufficient to establish qualifying military service within the terms of section 701.

Pena v. Bjorndal

177 F. App'x 666 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 19, 2006

Where a plaintiff establishes a prima facie claim of retaliation, as here, then the burden shifts to the defendant to demonstrate that “[the employer] would have reached the same decision even in the absence of the [employee … Although Bjorndal raises the question, the district court did not address whether Bjorndal was entitled to qualified immunity.

Gathercole v. Global Associates

727 F.2d 1485 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 14, 1984

. § 860.102 (1981) ] established a 60-year age limitation for pilots. … Furthermore, the 60-year regulatory requirement was “clearly imposed by the FAA and by the Army for the safety and convenience of the public”. Starr v.

Amir Shabazz v. Felix Igbinosa

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 13, 2019

We review de novo the district court’s ruling on qualified immunity. George v. Edholm, 752 F.3d 1206, 1214 (9th Cir. 2014). We vacate and remand. … Youseff, 914 F.3d 1218, 1229 (9th Cir. 2019), concluded that a prisoner’s “right to be free from heightened exposure to Valley Fever spores” was not clearly established.

Church of Scientology v. United States Postal Service

593 F.2d 902 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 26, 1979

The legislative history to the amendment clearly evinces Congress’ intention to overrule the Supreme Court’s expansive interpretation given to the original version of Exemption 3 in Administrator, FAA v. … The consideration of deference leads us to believe that the District Court should be allowed the first opportunity to consider whether 39 U.S.C. § 410 (c)(6) qualifies as an exempting statute within the meaning of 5 U.S.C

Daniel Humberto Chavez-Perez v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General

386 F.3d 1284 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 27, 2004

INS, 36 F.3d 801, 811-12 (9th Cir.1994) (establishing the corollary rule that persons found guilty under state law who would not have qualified under the FFOA were not entitled to receive favorable immigration treatment, … even if they did qualify for expungement under state law).

Bowie v. California Dept. of Corrections

99 F.3d 1145 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 15, 1996

As Ballard's actions did not violate clearly established law, he is entitled to qualified immunity and the district court's grant of summary judgment on this issue was proper. Hudson v. … Ballard is also entitled to qualified immunity and summary judgment on this issue, since he did not violate a "well-established right".

United States v. Maria Del Socorro Pardo Viuda De Aguilar, United States of America v. Anthony Clark, A/K/A Antonio Clark, United States of America v. Sister Darlene Nicgorski, School Sisters of Saint Francis, United States of America v. Philip M. Willis-Conger, A/K/A Phillip M. Conger, United States of America v. John M. Fife, United States of America v. Margaret Jean Hutchison, A/K/A Peggy Hutchison, United States of America v. Wendy Lewin, United States of America v. Ramon Dagoberto Quinones

883 F.2d 662 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 14, 1989

While the court did not reach the merits of the churches' claims, it did discuss the government's contention that the individual government agents were entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate clearly established … The court agreed with the government that the agents were entitled to qualified immunity, finding that the Zurcher decision "cannot be said to clearly settle the Fourth Amendment issue in this case."

United States v. Guillen-Favela

295 F. App'x 219 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 30, 2008

. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A) because the record did not establish that his previous conviction necessarily qualified as a drug trafficking offense. … We conclude that the record does not clearly and unequivocally establish that Guillen-Favela was previously convicted of a drug trafficking offense, and that the enhancement was therefore improper. See Malta-Espinoza v.

Alanis-Alvarado v. Mukasey

541 F.3d 966 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 3, 2008

We agree that the record does not establish what portion of the protective order Petitioner violated. … Most of that conduct (e.g., “molesting, attacking, striking, stalking, threatening, sexually assaulting, battering, [and] harassing”) clearly involves violence, threats, or harassment.

Wedges/ledges of California, Inc. A California Corporation v. City of Phoenix, Arizona, a Municipality

24 F.3d 56 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 24, 1994

substantively were “clearly arbitrary and unreasonable, having no substantial relation to the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare.” … We believe that this evidence is sufficient to establish that, whatever the merits of Appellants’ procedural challenges, the four and a half month ban was not clearly arbitrary and irrational.

98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4773, 98 Daily Journal D.A.R. 6753 Harold F. Rice v. Benjamin J. Cayetano, Governor of the State of Hawai'i Mazie K. Hirono, Lieutenant Governor of the State of Hawai'i

146 F.3d 1075 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 22, 1998

Further, the voter qualification at issue here--albeit clearly racial on its face--does not exclude those who ever had, now have, or ever can have any interest in the outcome of the special election for trustees (at least … Id 19 Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment provides: No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life