Case law

97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9421, 97 Daily Journal D.A.R. 15,151 Paris Hoyt Carriger v. Terry L. Stewart, Director of the Arizona Department of Corrections

132 F.3d 463 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 17, 1997

Nothing establishes that the clothes had been worn by Carriger, rather than Dunbar. (Postconviction evidence established they fit both men.) … Postconviction testimony established that the boots fit Dunbar.

B.S. v. Placentia-Yorba Linda Unified School District

306 F. App'x 397 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 5, 2009

The District requested a due process hearing to establish that the individualized educational plan (“IEP”) developed for B.S. and placement offer for the 2005-2006 school year was adequate. … The issues to be tried were clearly laid out in the Prehearing Conference Order, and witness lists had been exchanged.

Gordon T. Dockray v. Phelps Dodge Corporation

801 F.2d 1149 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 6, 1986

Dockray's age and seniority qualify him for a 70/80 Vesting pension. 6 The Plan Administrator, Robert McGowan, is also the Director of Employees Benefits for Phelps Dodge. … The Plan provides for a 70/80 Vesting pension to a qualified employee who is "laid off ... for lack of work."

Paulino v. Harrison

542 F.3d 692 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 4, 2008

Here, the district court applied that analysis and found by a preponderance of the evidence that Paulino established purposeful discrimination—a finding that was not clearly erroneous. … The district court’s finding is not clearly erroneous. Paulino presented a strong prima facie case of discrimination.

Committee of Central American Refugees v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

795 F.2d 1434 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 31, 1986

, 523 (9th Cir.1984). “ ‘The decision to grant or deny is within the discretion of the trial court and will only be reversed if that discretion has been abused or if the decision is based on erroneous legal standards or clearly … Such matters are so exclusively entrusted to the political branches of government as to be largely immune from judicial inquiry or interference.” In Hampton v.

Skokomish Indian Tribe v. United States

332 F.3d 551 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 3, 2003

Therefore, the Tribe challenges the “construction, maintenance, or operation” of the Project and the United States is immune from that challenge. … Moreover, in 1948, the Tribe filed a quiet title action to establish title to a strip of tidelands adjoining the Tribe’s reservation on the Hood Canal. France, 320 F.2d at 206 .

Celia Mazzei v. Cir

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 2, 2021

Appellants established a FSC under since-repealed provisions of Internal Revenue Code §§ 921–927 (the FSC statute). … S qualifies as a DISC for its taxable year. S has no employees on its payroll.

Muckleshoot Indian Tribe v. U.S. Forest Service

177 F.3d 800 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 19, 1999

The United States has waived sovereign immunity in this case pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 702 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . … This alternative clearly falls within the range of such reasonable alternatives, and should have been considered.

Robert McDaniels v. Richard Kirkland

760 F.3d 933 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 25, 2014

We thus first consider whether, in 2003 when the CCA issued its opinion, it was clearly established that comparative juror analysis was required such that we cannot give deference to the state court here. … While Supreme Court law may have clearly established so strong a preference for comparative 14 MCDANIELS V.

Robert Lewis Himes v. S. Frank Thompson

336 F.3d 848 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 10, 2003

A rule qualifies as an "old rule” under Teague jurisprudence if it satisfies the "clearly established” requirement of 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1). See Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. at 412, 120 S.Ct. 1495 . … The caveat, of course, is that unlike Teague , § 2254(d)(1) restricts the source of the clearly established law to Supreme Court jurisprudence.

United States v. Gamboa-Cardenas

508 F.3d 491 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 8, 2007

Section 3E1.1 of the sentencing guidelines states, “If a defendant clearly demonstrates acceptance of responsibility for his offense,” the district court will apply a two-level reduction. … In “rare situations,” however, a defendant can qualify for this downward adjustment even after going to trial and being-convicted. Id.

Honorable Bruce W. Dodds v. American Broadcasting Company, Inc., a Delaware Corporation

145 F.3d 1053 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 27, 1998

Although Judge Dodds was not specifically identified as such, he was clearly the subject of Hart’s statement. … Here, however, as we have explained, there are no such subsidiary statements that qualify.

Crystal Sweet v. Ruiz

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 6, 2022

Likewise, she has not established as a matter of law that she suffered a violation of her Eighth Amendment rights. See Somers v. Thurman, 109 F.3d 614, 622–23 (9th Cir. 1997); cf. Bearchild v. … Also, because we affirm the district court’s summary judgment, we need not address Defendants’ additional arguments regarding qualified immunity and Eleventh Amendment immunity.

David Luther Ghent v. Jeanne S. Woodford, Warden, of California State Prison at San Quentin

279 F.3d 1121 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 11, 2002

Rather, it clearly included his opinion as to Ghent’s mental state at the *1130 time of the murder. He testified that “Mr. … Shoor’s testimony was introduced to immunize the jury against this crucial defense evidence. Indeed, Dr. Shoor’s testimony went to the heart of Ghent’s defense.

USA V. ENRIQUE HOLGUIN

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 13, 2022

Figueroa-Lopez, 125 F.3d 1241, 1246-47 (9th Cir. 1997) (testimony about training and experience “clearly” established qualifications to offer expert testimony about the modus operandi of drug dealers). … Alatorre, for example, upheld the district court’s admission of a Customs Service agent’s expert testimony because “voir dire established that” the expert “was qualified to testify” about both the value of the drugs at

Haideh G. Moghaddam v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

45 F.3d 436 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 16, 1994

She also appeals its denial of her motion to remand to establish her right to suspension of deportation. … INS, 12 F.3d 1233, 1242 (3d Cir.1993) ("[F]eminism qualifies as a political opinion within the meaning of the relevant statutes.").

Estate of Henry Barabin v. Astenjohnson, Inc.

740 F.3d 457 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 15, 2014

Cohen was not qualified to testify as an expert and that his theory was not the product of scientific methodology. Asten-Johnson and Scapa argued that Dr. … Nevertheless, Rule 702 “clearly contemplates some degree of regulation of the subjects and theories about which an expert may testify.” Daubert, 509 U.S. at 589 , 113 S.Ct. 2786 (emphasis added).

Winn v. Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization

586 F.3d 649 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 21, 2009

The statute says that for an organization to qualify as *651 an STO eligible to receive state-reimbursed contributions the organization must provide scholarships "to children to allow them to attend any qualified school of … [This] clearly dispel[s] the claim that the program creates financial incentives for parents to choose a sectarian school."

Nunez v. City Of Los Angeles

147 F.3d 867 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 5, 1998

Individual applicants for a promotion must still establish qualification. … Group preferences, which merely establish group goals, do not suffice.

Local 159, 342, 343 & 444 v. Nor-Cal Plumbing, Inc.

185 F.3d 978 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 27, 1999

District 17, UMW, 897 F.2d 149 , 152 (4th Cir.1990) (holding that “[a]s the plan administrator, the [pension] fund is clearly a fiduciary”). … This provision does not itself establish federal jurisdiction over actions brought under ERISA by pension plans.