Case law

Armis Arrendondo v. Dwight Neven

763 F.3d 1122 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 18, 2014

Section 2254(d)(1) permits ha-beas relief not only where a state court decision is inconsistent with clearly established Supreme Court law, but also where its decision “involved an unreasonable application of[ ] clearly established … We need not further evaluate Von Moltke’s independent authority as clearly established Supreme Court law, because Tovar clearly establishes that a defendant waiving counsel must understand "the range of allowable punishments

United States v. Rendon-Duarte

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 19, 2007

In the absence of objection, the district court accepted the facts stated in the PSR as established by a pre- ponderance of the evidence. … 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

Coleman v. Quaker Oats Co.

232 F.3d 1271 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 20, 2000

— have established such a case. … Fifth, Jeney asserts that younger, less qualified individuals were hired for the jobs for which he was qualified.

Asarco LLC v. Atlantic Richfield Co.

866 F.3d 1108 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 10, 2017

The CERCLA Decree established a custodial trust for the Site, and turned over cleanup responsibility to a trustee. … The agreement clearly required Asarco to take response actions to clean up hazardous waste at the Site.

United States v. Elmer Brady, Jr., United States of America v. Joseph James Waters

579 F.2d 1121 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 8, 1978

The record clearly establishes that the trial judge forthwith intervened and assured the witness that she had nothing to fear. … Indeed, it can rarely be established by any other means.

Anthony Mitchell v. Joseph Chronister

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 3, 2018

when considered in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, show no violation of a constitutional right, or no violation of a right that is clearly established in law.” … Our jurisdiction, however, “does not extend to all denials of qualified immunity on summary judgment.” Id. at 945.

Oase v. City of Tucson, Arizona

103 F.3d 140 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 6, 1996

. § 1291 . 1 We review de novo the district court's summary judgment and grant of qualified immunity, see Hervey v. … This contention has merit. 6 Public officials sued under section 1983 are entitled to qualified immunity if: (1) the law governing the official's conduct was not clearly established at the time of the alleged violation, or

Richard Bowen v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration

925 F.2d 1225 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 21, 1991

The burden is upon the government agency to establish that a given document is exempt from disclosure. Van Bourg, Allen, Weinberg & Roger v. … First, the district court did not clearly err in determining that exemption 4 had been properly claimed.

City of Tucson v. U.S. West Communications, Inc., a Colorado Corporation, Now Known as Qwest Corporation v. Martha Chase, Ex Rel State of Arizona, County Attorney for Santa Cruz County County of Santa Cruz, Plaintiffs-Intervenors-Appellees

284 F.3d 1128 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 26, 2002

Yet, the language of " § 1447(d) must be read in pari materia with § 1447(c), so that only remands based on grounds specified in § 1447(c) are immune from review under § 1447(d)." Things Remembered Inc. v. … A.R.S. §§ 9-499.01 (establishing that a municipality may not grant a franchise without the consent of a majority of the qualified voters), 12-2041, -2042, -2043.

Diaz v. Baca

203 F. App'x 884 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 2, 2006

established Federal law,” as determined by the Supreme Court. 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1). … Accordingly, the state court decision was not “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law,” as required by § 2254(d)(1).

Kahawaiolaa v. Norton

386 F.3d 1271 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 27, 2004

commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department; or a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it; or the impossibility of deciding without an initial policy determination of a kind clearly … Mancari, the Supreme Court explained that employment preferences for certain qualified Indians in the Bureau of Indian Affairs, did not constitute "racial discrimination," or even a "racial" preference. 417 U.S. 535, 553-

Jenks v. Hull

67 F.3d 307 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 28, 1995

the Jenkses failed to show that the contours of their constitutional right to family integrity were clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. 6 The doctrine of qualified immunity is intended to provide government … "Government officials performing discretionary functions enjoy qualified immunity from civil damages so long as their conduct does not violate 'clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

Bates v. UPS

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 27, 2007

The court further con- cluded that Bates did not have the burden to establish at that stage that any plaintiffs were “qualified” in the sense that they were capable of driving safely. … The statute does not require that a person meet each of an employer’s established “qualification standards,” however, to show that he is “qualified.”

Rodrigo Turijan v. Eric Holder, Jr.

744 F.3d 617 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 10, 2014

This realistic probability can be established by showing that, in at least one other case, the state courts in fact did apply the statute in the special (nongeneric) manner .... … categorical crime of moral turpitude . . . even though California courts have held the contrary under their evidentiary standard for purposes of impeachment of a defendant”) (emphasis in original). 4 While the situation was clearly

United States v. Richard Aichele

941 F.2d 761 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 30, 1991

839, 840-41 (9th Cir.1990) (per curiam) (following Perez-Franco); Oliveras, 905 F.2d at 626 (defendant’s statements to probation officer in presen-tence proceedings admissible in subsequent criminal prosecutions unless immunized … I would therefore vacate his sentence and remand with instructions that the district court give defendant an opportunity to qualify for the two-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility.

United States v. Flores-Correa

152 F. App'x 656 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 2, 2005

He contends that the government failed to meet its burden of establishing that his 1988 drug conviction under Cal. … We conclude that the documents and judicially noticeable facts presented to the district court do not satisfy the government’s burden of establishing “clearly and unequivocally” — not merely by a preponderance of the evidence

Local 246 Utility Workers Union of America v. Southern California Edison Co.

83 F.3d 292 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 6, 1996

We conclude, however, that the supplemental payments fail to qualify as “similar payments which are not made as compensation for [the employee’s] hours of employment.” … Here,-the employees’ claim against Edison is clearly based on the statute; there is no dispute over what the Agreement or Plan provides.

WMX Technologies, Inc. v. Miller

80 F.3d 1315 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 8, 1996

Furthermore, even if the plaintiffs had established both prongs of the “stigma-plus” test, there is no state action to support the latter prong of the test. … Miller’s Claim of Legislative Immunity Because we affirm the district court’s dismissal of all claims, we do not address Miller’s claim of legislative immunity. AFFIRMED. .

Sabil M. Mujahid v. George Sumner

996 F.2d 1226 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 28, 1993

did not have a clearly established right to do so. … This contention lacks merit. 6 Prison officials are entitled to qualified immunity unless their conduct "violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known."

Larry L. Jones Janet Jones v. Etrade Mortgage Corporation Etrade Bank

397 F.3d 810 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 11, 2005

It identified the Joneses and their property and established a loan amount of $201,000 at an interest rate of 7.25 percent. … To that end, the law requires creditors to “clearly and conspicuously disclose” borrowers’ rights to rescind a home mortgage loan, in accordance with regulations of the Federal Reserve Board. 15 U.S.C. § 1635 (a).