Case law

Moses v. Payne

543 F.3d 1090 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 15, 2008

The state court’s application of clearly established law must be objectively unreasonable.” Id. (citations omitted). … Nor can we conclude that Miller merely “illuminates the application of clearly established federal law as determined by the United States Supreme Court.” Crater, 491 F.3d at 1126 n. 8.

Rosas-Castaneda v. Holder

655 F.3d 875 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 4, 2011

The Record of Conviction Is Inconclusive as to Whether Rosas-Castaneda’s Offense Qualifies as an Aggravated Felony. … Sandoval-Lua clearly applies. Nijhawan merely reaffirms that it does.  ROSAS-CASTANEDA v.

Robert Jay Rowen v. Nora Elliott United States of America

52 F.3d 334 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 18, 1995

Sec. 2679 (b)(1); Green, 8 F.3d at 698 . 8 The employees are protected by qualified immunity for constitutional torts (Bivens actions). … Government employees are entitled to qualified immunity unless their conduct violates "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Mitchel v.

Skokomish Indian v. Tacoma Public Utilities

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.

Kareem Howell v. C. Tran

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 25, 2019

it was not clearly established that Tran’s conduct violated the Eighth Amendment. … al–Kidd, 563 U.S. 731, 741 (2011) (discussing qualified immunity and noting that a right is clearly established only if “every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that right” (citation

Madden v. United States

20 F.2d 289 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 13, 1927

And it is not pretended that any proof was offered to establish the existence of the alleged statutory provision. … These were matters clearly within the discretion of the court.

David A. Dusenbury v. William F. Stovall, Charles W. Clark, Jack O'Neil

958 F.2d 376 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 19, 1992

established at the time of the investigation. 3 Accordingly, we reverse. 4 * A 5 In determining whether a government official is shielded by qualified immunity, "[t]he threshold question, which is a question of law, is ' … We review the qualified immunity question de novo. Tomer v. Gates, 811 F.2d 1240, 1241 (9th Cir.1987).

Thomas J. Doyle and Laura A. Doyle v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

354 F.2d 480 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 3, 1966

In 1944, he and his family established a home in Lodi, California. … We are not persuaded that its decision, under the circumstances, is clearly erroneous.

United States v. Estate of E. Wayne Hage

810 F.3d 712 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 15, 2016

All three Acts clearly state that the issuance of a permit does not create any property rights. … Hence, as between the Government and appellees, the latter are now clearly trespassers.").

Southern Pac. Co. v. Rauh

49 F. 696 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 7, 1892

It has therefore been held that the findings of the court upon the qualifications of jurors will not be reviewed unless it *701 clearly appears that the court has exercised its discretion arbitrarily. State v. … It is no ground for exception that, against his objection, a juror was rejected by the court upon- insufficient grounds, unless, through rejecting qualified persons, the necessity of accepting others, not qualified, has been

United States v. Robert Louis Boettjer

569 F.2d 1078 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 17, 1978

It is also established that registered physicians are not immune from prosecution under 21 U.S.C. § 841 when their activities fall outside the usual course of professional practice. United States v. … The more difficult question here is whether the given instruction clearly and sufficiently stated the applicable law to the jury.

United States v. Dorothy Marie Willard

230 F.3d 1093 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 25, 2000

Moreover, their testimony established that Defendant threatened her daughter with criminal prosecution and dire spiritual consequences if she testified. … Although the commentary’s reading of the guideline is limiting, we cannot go as far as to say that it is clearly erroneous. See United States v.

United States v. Saavedra-Velazquez

578 F.3d 1103 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 21, 2009

We review de novo “a district court’s determination that a prior conviction qualifies as a ‘crime of violence’ under the Guidelines.... ” United States v. … Under this standard, acts normally considered only preparatory could be sufficient to establish liability. 34 Cal.3d 441 , 194 Cal.Rptr. 390 , 668 P.2d 697 , 702 n. 1 (1983) (citations omitted); see also People v.

Assurance Wireless USA, L.P. v. Alice Reynolds

100 F.4th 1024 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 26, 2024

To qualify for an injunction, the moving party must establish a likelihood of success on the merits, that it will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of injunctive relief, that the balance of the equities tips in its favor … Other examples establishing that “inconsistent” does not mean “different” abound. The Supreme Court has explained that “a later statute repeals former ones when clearly inconsistent with the earlier enactments.”

Ackerman-Chillingworth v. Pacific Electrical Contractors Association

579 F.2d 484 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 31, 1978

Thus, the anticompetitive effects of the closed agency relationship were clearly "intended." (See also Albrecht v. … On summary judgment, however, the burden was upon the defendants, who moved for summary judgment, clearly to establish the non-existence of any genuine issue of fact material to judgment in their favor. (E. g., SEC v.

Todd Roberts v. Springfield Utility Board

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 12, 2023

“[I]f the defendant does plead the [qualified] immunity defense, the district court should resolve that threshold question before permitting discovery.” Crawford-El v. … Here, Peck and Rubanoff raised a qualified immunity defense, so the district court was justified in proceeding to summary judgment without permitting their depositions to proceed.

Nicholas Yarofalchuw v. John Cabrera

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 8, 2024

Aug. 21, 2023), in which we affirmed a district court’s denial of qualified immunity on a plaintiff’s search and seizure claims. … Moreover, Brizuela cannot have clearly established that Yarofalchuw’s arrest in 2021 was unlawful: it is an unpublished memorandum disposition and was decided after the events of this case.

Horne v. United States Department of Agriculture

673 F.3d 1071 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 12, 2012

See 7 U.S.C. § 608c(14)(B) (immunizing from civil pen- alty any handler who “in good faith and not for delay” files and prosecutes a qualifying administrative petition). … Therefore, an administrative petition not filed until 2007 cannot immunize the Hornes from fines relating to their conduct in 2002-04.  HORNE v.

Bernardi v. Yeutter

951 F.2d 971 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 22, 1991

If a district court has discretion to determine the amount of fees to be awarded, it clearly has discretion to determine whether a future fee schedule should be established. … The Secretary asserts that § 1961 does not constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity from interest awards and thus the award was an error of law. See Library of Congress v.

Boy Scouts of America v. Graham

76 F.3d 1045 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 15, 1996

In such cases, appellate review tends to be reduced to an audit of the judge’s instructions, and if they pass muster, almost any award the jury sees fit to make will stand immune from further review. U.S. Const, amend. … The plaintiff clearly contributed to the function of the vessel.