Case law

Asarco LLC v. Atlantic Richfield Co.

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. 186,416.00

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 20, 2009

The First Circuit held that the exclusionary rule “clearly could not have barred the district court from considering the defendant’s voluntary state- ments as set forth in the PSR.” Id. at 505. … The LAPD would qualify to receive forfeited funds under this provision, should the fed- eral government elect to make such a transfer.

Joseph Anthony Padilla v. Cal A. Terhune

309 F.3d 614 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Oct 29, 2002

As the prevailing party, the state had no reason to argue that the statement was also trustworthy, separate and apart from qualifying as a statement against interest. … Rocha’s detailed testimony established the critical element of intent and was corroborated by Munoz.

United States v. Aundre Sterling Wright

215 F.3d 1020 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jun 19, 2000

Once the existence of a conspiracy is established, evidence establishing beyond a reasonable doubt even a slight connection of a defendant with the conspiracy is sufficient to convict the defendant of knowing participation … Armed bank robbery qualifies as a crime of violence because one of the elements of the offense is a taking “by force and violence, or by intimidation.” 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a).

The Association Of Mexicanamerican Educators v. State Of California

183 F.3d 1055 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 12, 1999

In determining whether something qualifies as an "other school system " within the meaning of S 2000d-4a(2)(B), we do not simply ask whether it calls itself a "school system." … This court has held that given this relationship, school districts enjoy the State's immunity under the Eleventh Amendment.

United States v. Bright

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Feb 26, 2010

The government had established that other docu- ments remained outstanding. 4. … The Brights argue that the district court clearly erred in finding that the act of producing records concerning offshore 3146 UNITED STATES v.

United States v. 186,416.00 in US

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 7, 2010

CURRENCY Motorcycle Serial # 4A25791H1, 508 F.2d 351, 351 (9th Cir. 1974) (per curiam) (“The mere fact of the illegal seizure, standing alone, does not immunize the goods from forfeiture.” … The LAPD would qualify to receive forfeited search. Id. at 505 n.7 (quoting Wong Sun, 371 U.S. at 486).

Sali ex rel. Themselves v. Corona Reg'l Med. Ctr.

909 F.3d 996 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 3, 2018

Hence, the proof required to establish standing varies at the complaint, summary judgment and trial phases. Id. … But the district court clearly misapplied California law in reaching that conclusion.

Towery v. Schriro

641 F.3d 300 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 22, 2010

We shall therefore explain why Towery’s constitutional rights were not violated under any of the clearly established due process frameworks governing prosecutorial misconduct. 2. … unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law . . . or was based on an unreasonable determina- tion of the facts in light of the evidence presented.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d). 1.

United States v. Anthony Alexander Alvarez

960 F.2d 830 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 31, 1992

establish that the conviction is a predicate conviction for enhancement purposes”); United States v. … A defendant is a “career” offender if he has committed two qualifying prior “crime[s] of violence” or “controlled substance offense[s].” U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1.

Jewel v. National Security Agency

673 F.3d 902 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 29, 2011

The district court held that Jewel failed to make out prima facie allega- tions necessary to establish that she was an “aggrieved per- son” under the FISA. … For example, the district court’s determination that Jewel was not an “Aggrieved Person” under the FISA or a qualified plaintiff under the other statutes is a merits determination, not a threshold standing question.

Mel Dar Corporation, a Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Coy Burnett and Mildred K. Burnett v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

309 F.2d 525 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 6, 1962

The business purpose doctrine was established by Gregory v. Helvering, 293 U.S. 465 , 55 S.Ct. 266 , 79 L.Ed. 56 (1935) aff’g, 69 F.2d 809 (2d Cir. 1934). … following quotation from Judge Learned Hand’s Gregory opinion in the Court of Appeals is instructive: “We agree with the * * * taxpayer that a transaction, otherwise within an exception of the tax law, does not lose its immunity

Smith v. Mahoney

611 F.3d 978 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jul 13, 2010

mental illness, either of which might qualify as mitigating evidence. … However, Montana law requires more for a defendant to qualify for mitigated deliberate homicide.

United States v. Laron Kevin Kortgaard

425 F.3d 602 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Sep 21, 2005

The Court clearly stated in Booker : “Any fact (other than a prior conviction) which is necessary to support a sentence exceeding the maximum authorized by the facts established by a plea of guilty or a jury verdict must … U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3. 3 Uncounted prior offenses are clearly part of the inquiry under § 4A1.3, but that is only where the inquiry begins, not where it ends.

Balcorta v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp.

208 F.3d 1102 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 6, 2000

Clearly, § 301 does not grant the parties to a collective-bargaining agreement the ability to contract for what is illegal under state law.... … [I]t would be inconsistent with congressional intent under that section to preempt state rules that proscribe conduct, or establish rights and obligations, independent of a labor contract.

Emil Schoepflin and William Smith v. United States

391 F.2d 390 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 2, 1968

In deciding this question the “clearly erroneous” rule of Rule 52(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, is to be applied. See United States v. … Since tlie trial began on February 15, . 1065, which was prior to the effective date of the guidelines established in Miranda v.

Derwin Jackson v. W. Sullivan

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 12, 2017

It was clearly established in 2004 that exercise restrictions lasting longer than six weeks ordinarily give rise to Eighth Amendment liability. See Lopez, 203 F.3d at 1133; Allen v. … We therefore hold, regarding Jackson’s Eighth Amendment claim, that Meadors and Cobbs are not entitled to summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity.

United States v. Dennis Leveque, United States of America v. John Kevin Moore

283 F.3d 1098 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Mar 15, 2002

Under the latter construction, however, they might be. 1 Because it is questionable which construction was relied on, and the trial court did not clearly instruct the jury that it could only convict defendants based on the … To prove the existence of a conspiracy, the Government must establish that there was an agreement among two or more persons to accomplish an unlawful objective, and that the defendant committed an overt act in furtherance

LASSANA MAGASSA V. ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Nov 9, 2022

Qualifying orders (1) are supported by a “reviewable administrative record,” (2) are a “definitive statement of the agency’s position,” (3) have a “direct and immediate effect on the day-to-day business of the party asserting … Neither were other circuits immune. See, e.g., Sima Prods. Corp. v.

McConnell v. MEBA Medical & Benefits Plan

778 F.2d 521 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 7, 1985

of the District 2 Plan provides: The eligibility of an employee (for benefits) shall terminate on the earliest of the following dates: (d) the date the employee becomes eligible for benefits under any other welfare plan established … a member of any MEBA District who has insufficient days of employment for eligibility in any one of the aforesaid Plans the following rule shall apply: If he has sufficient days of covered employment under all Plans to qualify