Case law

Holgate v. Baldwin

425 F.3d 671 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 30, 2005

[not] warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law[.]" Fed.R.Civ.P. 11(b)(2). … The Holgates' complaint failed even this minimal test. 12 We have held that "the mere existence of one non-frivolous claim" in a complaint does not immunize it from Rule 11 sanctions. Townsend v.

Bockting v. Bayer

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 26, 2007

He argues that the state court decision involved an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law and was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts. … Bockting also mistakenly argues that the Nevada Supreme Court’s decision involved an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law because evidence confirming  BOCKTING v.

Railway Labor Executives' Ass'n v. Burnley

839 F.2d 575 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 11, 1988

It has long been clearly settled that blood tests such as those mandated by 49 C.F.R. § 219.203 are searches within the meaning of the fourth amendment. Schmerber v. … In all cases blood shall be drawn only by a qualified medical professional or by a qualified technician subject to the supervision of a qualified medical professional. . § 219.213 Unlawful refusals; consequences.

Larry v. Riles

793 F.2d 969 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 25, 1986

Secs. 1401-1461 , provides that a state qualifying for federal assistance under the Act must establish: 58 procedures to assure that testing and evaluation materials and procedures utilized for the purposes of evaluation … This finding also is not clearly erroneous.

Bernardi v. Yeutter

942 F.2d 562 · 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 *567 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 Liberty of Congress v.

IDK, Inc. v. County of Clark

836 F.2d 1185 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 8, 1988

We emphasize that our holding does not mean that the regulation is incapable of unconstitutional application in particular situations and does not immunize the regulation from challenges to its application. … None of the decisions cited in Roberts as establishing this right, 468 U.S. at 619 , 104 S.Ct. at 3250 , involved such a challenge. .

Territory of Alaska v. American Can Co.

246 F.2d 493 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 27, 1957

Considering the repealing act as a whole, we should bear in mind that being a special or, in the words of the Supreme Court, a “specific” enactment, it qualifies and furnishes exceptions to the general repeal law of Alaska … The principle is well established in California. In Los Angeles Brewing Co. v.

Salmeron v. United States

724 F.2d 1357 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 28, 1983

It has long been established that the court in which a minor's claims are being litigated has a duty to protect the minor's interests. See, e.g., Thompson v. … Nor do we address the issue of what effect, if any, the doctrines of absolute and qualified immunity might *1365 have on the claims against the various government officials in this case.

Alcazar v. Corporation of the Catholic Archbishop

598 F.3d 668 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 16, 2010

As in the Title VII context, we next examine whether the Washington Minimum Wage Act implicates the Establishment Clause. … We have never clearly announced a test to determine whether an employee is a “minister” under the ministerial exception. In Bollard, Elvig, and Werft, we assumed the plaintiffs were ministers. In EEOC v.

James Soler v. County of San Diego

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 26, 2019

immunity because the right at issue was “clearly established.” … Amendment were clearly established.”

United States v. Clara Bell Hall

543 F.2d 1229 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 25, 1977

More fundamentally, it unduly warps established legal principles, enabling it to ride roughshod over both state and federal law. … But it was careful to note its awareness that the term “any investigative or law-enforcement officer” as employed in the statute includes state officers and to expressly qualify its observation with this concluding sentence

United States v. Redlightning

624 F.3d 1090 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 25, 2010

Breen “is not qualified as an expert in these areas.” … Breen was not qualified to testify about the effects of a police interrogation but was qualified to testify about Redlightning’s mental con- dition due to his PTSD.

Gonzales v. Brown

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 30, 2009

To qualify as clearly established federal law, the Supreme Court need not apply a rule to a fact pattern precisely identical to this case. Panetti v. Quarterman, 551 U.S. 930, 953 (2007). … Since then, the Supreme Court has further discussed what Batson clearly established when it reviewed the case of Miller-El v.

Clark v. Calderon

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 16, 2006

If those had been the facts, the Court wrote, the arson would not have qualified as a special circumstance. … In Webster, we implicitly — but clearly — rejected the State’s suggested application of McSherry to special circumstance statutes.

Everett Fruit Products Co. v. Hoffman

18 F.2d 21 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 21, 1927

While some of the witnesses testified that substandard is an established grade of definite characteristics, the facts admitted by all clearly show that such statements are to be understood in a highly qualified sense, and … as contended by plaintiffs, substandard is a grade of fruit of certain and uniform quality and characteristics, there was no need for the approval clause; for upon that theory the rights and duties of both parties were clearly

Bockting v. Bayer

505 F.3d 973 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 12, 2007

Bockting has not demonstrated the state court's adjudication on the merits: "(1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the … He argues that the state court decision involved an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law and was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts.

Skagit County Public Hospital District No. 2 v. Shalala

80 F.3d 379 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 5, 1996

Congress established the Medicare Geographic Classification Review Board (MGCRB or Classification Board) to adjudicate hospital requests for reclassification. … Island’s eom-plaint before the district court clearly fo-cussed on the wage data correction process insofar as it related to Island’s application for reclassification for fiscal year 1994.

Christensen v. Cir

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 21, 2008

For example, § 6015(e) directs the Tax Court to “establish rules which provide the individual filing a joint return but not making the election under subsection (b) or (c) or the request for equitable relief under subsection … By comparison, a taxpayer may qualify for relief under § 6015(f) for an understatement or an under- payment and need not show lack of knowledge.

Byron Paredes-Urrestarazu v. U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service

36 F.3d 801 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Aug 23, 1994

As the Gonzalez court reached the contrary conclusion, the Board clearly adopted the Paoli court’s analysis. … Rehabilitation The record supports the BIA’s determination that Petitioner did not establish rehabilitation.

United States v. Bertan-Manguia

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 6, 2007

which can, 5 Under Washington Revised Code section 9A.44.060(1), a person is guilty of third-degree rape if he engaged in sexual intercourse: “(a) [w]here the victim did not consent . . . and such lack of consent was clearly … The Oregon second-degree sexual abuse statute does not establish as a required element such communicative or suggestive acts. See also United States v.