Case law

Davison Ex Rel. Sims v. Santa Barbara High School District

48 F. Supp. 2d 1225 · District Court, C.D. California · May 11, 1998

established. … Indeed, it appears that California courts have established in a variety of contexts that “a governmental immunity is a jurisdictional bar to a claim for money damages against a public entity or employee.” Gates v.

Ismail v. Freeman

936 F. Supp. 2d 1157 · District Court, C.D. California · Oct 30, 2012

Katz, 533 U.S. 194 , 201-202, 121 S.Ct. 2151 , 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001) (standard for qualified immunity);, see, e.g., Doi v. Aoki, 2012 WL 3100179 , *15-16 (D.Haw. July 27, 2012) (qualified immunity analysis). … Neither of these police officers has invoked qualified immunity as a basis for their Rule 12(b)(6) motion. Defendants typically invoke qualified immunity in a motion for summary judgment. Accord Peterson v.

Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Alliance Document Preparation

296 F. Supp. 3d 1197 · District Court, C.D. California · Nov 2, 2017

Defendants also engaged in deceptive practices by informing consumers who clearly did not qualify for such programs that they were eligible for relief; for instance, one of Defendants' agents told a consumer that he qualified … As discussed above, the FTC has clearly established a likelihood of showing that Defendants have misled consumers in regard to this issue. Section III.C.1.b, Supra.

PELICULAS Y VIDEOS INTERNACIONALES, SA DE CV v. Harriscope of Los Angeles, Inc.

302 F. Supp. 2d 1131 · District Court, C.D. California · Feb 10, 2004

PVI moves for partial summary judgment, seeking to establish that a producer’s assignee may qualify as an “author” under the URAA. … Thus, the evidence clearly establishes that infringing acts, that is, the creation of the pan and scan copies and the broadcast of the films, occurred prior to January 1, 1996.

Terminal-Hudson Electronics, Inc. v. Department of Consumer Affairs

407 F. Supp. 1075 · District Court, C.D. California · Jan 6, 1976

June 16, 1975). 1 Therein the majority at 818, 95 S.Ct. at 2231 say of the Chrestensen rationale of non-First Amendment protection “to paid commercial advertisements” that: “Our cases, however, clearly establish that speech … Opti-Cal seeks identical temporary and permanent relief from state law infringement of First Amendment privileges and immunities.

League of United Latin American Citizens v. City of Santa Ana

410 F. Supp. 873 · District Court, C.D. California · Mar 22, 1976

Clearly if the defendants could have established that the pass-fail rates on the written tests attacked by the plaintiffs did not reveal a disproportionate impact on minority applicants, general population statistics would … Clearly such procedures are not countenanced by the EEOC Guidelines or by Title VII.

Guzman v. Van Demark

651 F. Supp. 1180 · District Court, C.D. California · Jan 14, 1987

Thus, the CHP’s immunity is coextensive with the State’s immunity. … First, Wilson certainly establishes a new legal principle.

Church of Scientology of California v. Linberg

529 F. Supp. 945 · District Court, C.D. California · Dec 14, 1981

It is well-established that suits to enjoin the United States or its agencies, like damage suits, cannot be maintained unless Congress first consents by enacting a waiver of sov *962 ereign immunity. 14 Wright & Miller, supra … Even the qualified immunity for “good faith” conduct which the Government defendants may later assert, see Butz v.

Bentzlin v. Hughes Aircraft Co.

833 F. Supp. 1486 · District Court, C.D. California · Sep 22, 1993

Plaintiffs now wish to conduct discovery to establish the truth of their allegations. … The policy decisions made in war are clearly beyond the competence of the courts to review, implicating factors [2] and [3] of Baker .

Cassirer v. Kingdom of Spain

461 F. Supp. 2d 1157 · District Court, C.D. California · Aug 30, 2006

Thus, whether or not Cassirer can ultimately establish an interest in the Painting, whether he can establish that his interest is superior to that of Spain and the Foundation, and whether he can establish a legal basis for … This slight distinction, however, is immaterial since the Complaint clearly alleges — and the Foundation admits- — -that the Foundation is an agent or instrumentality of Spain.

Corder v. Gates

688 F. Supp. 1418 · District Court, C.D. California · Jun 14, 1988

The jury also returned verdicts in favor of the remaining defendants; *1420 of these, it found that several of the officers had violated plaintiffs’ civil rights, but that they were entitled to qualified immunity. … The court believes that the jury instruction on the defense of qualified immunity accurately reflects current law. Anderson v.

Giannini v. Real

711 F. Supp. 992 · District Court, C.D. California · Apr 20, 1989

Immunity. The federal defendants assert that because they were acting in their legislative capacity, they are absolutely immune from suit. … However, legislative immunity does not entitle a defendant to immunity from suits for declaratory or injunctive relief. See Shipp v. Todd, 568 F.2d 133, 134 (9th Cir.1978).

Ard v. Federal Deposit Insurance

770 F. Supp. 2d 1029 · District Court, C.D. California · Feb 11, 2011

Whether Plaintiffs’ Claims Are Barred By Exceptions to the Federal Tort Claims Act The United States, as sovereign, is immune from suit unless it has waived its immunity. … United States, 661 F.2d 740, 742 (9th Cir. 1981) (“[Government informant’s] admittedly intentional misrepresentations to plaintiffs were clearly within the chain of causative events upon which plaintiffs’ claim is founded

TYR Sport Inc. v. Warnaco Swimwear Inc.

679 F. Supp. 2d 1120 · District Court, C.D. California · May 27, 2009

false, (2) clearly material, (3) clearly likely to induce reasonable reliance, (4) made to buyers without knowledge of the subject *1133 matter, (5) continued for prolonged periods, and (6) not readily susceptible of neutralization … To establish its implied immunity in this case, USA Swimming primarily relies on persuasive authority from the Eleventh Circuit in JES Properties, Inc. v. USA Equestrian, Inc., 458 F.3d 1224 (11th Cir.2006).

Anderman v. Federal Republic of Austria

256 F. Supp. 2d 1098 · District Court, C.D. California · Apr 15, 2003

Ruhrgas also establishes that the Court can decide issues of justiciability as threshold issue. … sovereign immunity.

Our Peculiar Family v. Inspire Charter Schools

District Court, C.D. California · Jun 23, 2020

Qualified Immunity 14 Defendants move to dismiss claims one through six as to Jones in his individual 15 capacity based on qualified immunity. … Plaintiffs’ FAC Sufficiently Implicates A Clearly Established Right. 26 The Court now turns to the second step of the qualified immunity analysis, i.e. 27 whether the contours of the First Amendment right at issue

Miller v. Davis

420 F. Supp. 2d 1108 · District Court, C.D. California · Mar 8, 2006

immunity.” … The Court has reviewed the documentation provided by plaintiff, which establishes that plaintiff was released from prison custody, on June 18, 2002, and released from parole on June 18, 2005. 2 .

Bledsoe v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

90 F. Supp. 3d 901 · District Court, C.D. California · Feb 3, 2015

Plaintiff Cannot Work in An Occupation To Which She Qualifies Finally, based on the AR, the Court finds that Plaintiff is unable to participate in any occupation, to which she qualifies. … Shinada clearly demonstrate that Plaintiff cannot work long periods of time without accommodations.

Yunis v. United States

118 F. Supp. 2d 1024 · District Court, C.D. California · Jul 24, 2000

This argument relates to the doctrine of sovereign immunity and not what rule of decision should apply to this case. … Given the Court’s ruling, Angell’s status as a bona fide purchaser, assuming he qualifies as such, may be of no consequence. V.

League of United Latin American Citizens v. Wilson

997 F. Supp. 1244 · District Court, C.D. California · Nov 14, 1997

Thus, although basic public education clearly must be classified as a government benefit, just as health care is, the PRA does not purport to deny it to non-qualified aliens. … A specific provision of the PRA clearly conflicts with Proposition 187. The PRA delineates which state or local public benefits are to be denied to aliens who are not “qualified.” 8 U.S .C. § 1621(c).