Case law

Montana Power Company, a Corporation v. Environmental Protection Agency, and Northern Cheyenne Tribe and Northern Plains Resource Council, Intervenors. Montana Power Company, a Corporation v. Environmental Protection Agency, and Northern Plains Resource Council and Northern Cheyenne Tribe, Intervenors-Appellants. The Montana Power Company, Washington Water Power Company, Puget Sound Power and Light Company, Portland General Electric Company and Pacific Power and Light Company v. Environmental Protection Agency

608 F.2d 334 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 16, 1979

qualify for the contractual exemption, he must have contracted for continuous on-site construction work. … The function of the ratio is to establish a proper balance between entrepreneurial risks and social and economic utility. . . .

Alford v. United States

41 F.2d 157 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 26, 1930

While such evidence was clearly admissible to show that there was never any intent to complete tho purchase of 30,000 acres, nevertheless, having been stricken out, it cannot be considered. … If it had been contended that the witness was in custody because of his participation in the transaction with which the appellant was charged, and if it was sought to show that he was testifying under some promise of immunity

Technica LLC Ex Rel. United States v. Carolina Casualty Insurance

749 F.3d 1149 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 29, 2014

The common law doctrine of sovereign immunity prevented liens against property of the federal government, and federal statutes only allowed those in privity of contract with the government to sue to enforce contractual rights … Tenn. 1958) (holding that application of a state law defense requiring a corporation to qualify itself in Tennessee “would be futile, and would defeat the purpose of the [Miller] Act, if, having created the right to a surety

Georgia Henson v. John Florez, Robert Kinoshita, and Joe Cuccia

9 F.3d 1551 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 1, 1993

The district court granted the Supervisors' motion for summary judgment on the grounds of qualified immunity. We have jurisdiction of the timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . … We hold that qualified immunity bars suit against the officials for the alleged constitutional violations. 6 1. Right of Privacy under the Fourteenth Amendment 7 The Constitution protects two types of privacy interests.

Gonzalez-Medina v. Holder

641 F.3d 333 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 7, 2011

To qualify for withholding of removal, an applicant must establish that she is a refugee. 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158(b)(1)(B), 1231(b)(3)(C). … The INA’s withholding of removal provisions are clearly intended to protect individuals from being returned to countries where they are likely to be persecuted.

Landin-Molina v. Holder

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 1, 2009

As initially established, this process benefitted only those aliens who were in the United States lawfully. See id.; Succar v. Ashcroft, 394 F.3d 8, 13-14 (1st Cir. 2005). … Thus, § 1153(d) clearly contemplates that the marital relationship exists before the principal receives immigrant status.

Official Airline Guides, Inc. v. Goss

6 F.3d 1385 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 7, 1993

The district court’s judgment follows a remand from this court for reconsideration of whether OAG’s mark qualifies for trademark protection. … OAG contends that the district court’s finding of no likelihood of expansion is clearly erroneous.

Decker v. North Idaho College

552 F.2d 872 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 20, 1977

The measure defined in Wagie was not clearly announced until some years later. We find no abuse of discretion. II. … In this type of case, a compensatory award against the school officials would be appropriate only if they acted with such an impermissible motivation, or with such disregard of the person’s clearly established constitutional

Nikolay Otchkov v. Alan Everett

678 F. App'x 476 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 30, 2017

immunity. … See id. at 968 (“State officials are entitled to qualified immunity ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’”

Patenaude v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States

290 F.3d 1020 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 14, 2002

A SEP is an individual retirement account or individual retirement annuity, established pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 408(k). … A SEP is an alternative to the establishment of a more complex qualified pension plan, and is generally used by small business employers. .Under the Internal Revenue Code, funds placed in variable annuity contracts are taxed

Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Food & Drug Administration

819 F.3d 1102 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 11, 2016

As in Lion Raisins, 354 F.3d at 1079-80 , the declarations in this case established an adequate factual basis. … We next must decide whether the district court clearly erred in determining that the redacted information fell within Exemption 4’s protection.

Moses v. Payne

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). … Wilson’s testimony denied Moses his clearly established constitutional right to present a defense.

Petzak v. Nevada Ex Rel. Department of Corrections

385 F. App'x 635 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 22, 2010

Ct. 808, 821 (2009), we may begin the qualified immunity analysis by considering whether there is a violation of clearly established law without determining whether a constitutional violation occurred. … Turning to this prong, we conclude that application of the regulation did not violate clearly established law. Cf., e.g., Mass. Bd. of Ret. v.

Table Bluff Reservation (Wiyot Tribe) v. Philip Morris, Inc.

256 F.3d 879 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 16, 2001

.§§ 1981, the Privileges and Immunities Clause, the Thirteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1985 (3). … The Hise court characterized this allegation as "frivolous," because "plaintiffs clearly have no recognized property interest in paying a certain sum to a retailer to purchase a tobacco product." Id.

Alicia Naranjo Garcia v. Robert Wilkinson

988 F.3d 1136 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 18, 2021

Third, and finally, the BIA denied Garcia’s request for CAT relief by concluding that the IJ “did not clearly err in predicting the likelihood of [Garcia’s] future torture in Mexico, even considering the prior threats.” … WILKINSON 2012 and 2018, when combined with Garcia’s husband’s murder, qualified as persecution.

Styers v. Schriro

547 F.3d 1026 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 23, 2008

Habeas relief is therefore available only if the state court ruling “resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court … However, none of the twelve jurors stated that *1030 he or she had formed an opinion about this case—either qualified or unqualified. C.

Margaret Dezell v. Day Island Yacht Club

796 F.2d 324 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 8, 1986

Both the “fire and police protection” and the “sanitation inspection” arguments fall within the “state-furnished services” category, established in Moose Lodge No. 107 v. … The Liquor Board clearly never intended Wash.Admin.Code R. 314-16-195 to apply to private clubs qualifying for Class H licenses under Wash.Rev.Code § 66.24.450. See Op. Att’y Gen. No. 18 (1972).

Urias-Gaxiola v. Blanche

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 2, 2026

II We review for abuse of discretion “whether the BIA has clearly departed from its own standards.” Salgado v. Sessions, 889 F.3d 982, 987 (9th Cir. 2018). … to a prior admission” or “that he . . . is clearly and beyond a doubt entitled to be admitted to the United States and is not inadmissible as charged.” 8 C.F.R. § 1240.8(c).

Watts v. James

953 F.2d 1389 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 3, 1992

If qualified immunity applies, the shield from liability will be lifted only if the correctional officer's conduct "violate[s] clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … Id. at 590. 10 Therefore, given Watts' failure to demonstrate a clearly established right to be present when correspondence to or from a public agency is opened, Officer James was entitled to invoke qualified immunity and

Hurley v. Oregon

27 F.3d 392 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 17, 1994

However, under no circumstances can an amount established for one pay period only qualify as salary under the “regularly received each pay period” standard. … The evidence clearly shows that the penalties were in fact disciplinary reductions. First, the Manual permitted the police to impose "economic sanctions” for violations of rules.