Case law

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).

Kawaoka v. City of Arroyo Grande

796 F. Supp. 1320 · District Court, C.D. California · Apr 30, 1992

Standard of Review “To establish a violation of substantive due process, the plaintiffs must prove that the government's action was clearly arbitrary and unreasonable, having no substantial relation to the public health, … County of Santa, 689 F.2d 1345 , 1349-1350 (9th Cir.1982), members of local legislative bodies have complete immunity from suits based on their legislative acts and qualified immunity from suits based on their executive acts

Benjamin Woodhouse v. The United States Government

District Court, C.D. California · Jan 27, 2022

The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from civil liability where “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … or qualified immunity of all defendants.

Secretary of Housing & Urban Development v. Sky Meadow Ass'n

117 F. Supp. 2d 970 · District Court, C.D. California · Jul 24, 2000

By insuring the mortgage, HUD encourages private lenders to make loans to individuals who would not otherwise qualify for a loan. … Given the Court’s ruling, Erwin’s status as a bona fide purchaser, assuming he qualifies as such,' may be of no consequence. V.

Xavier Lopez v. City of Riverside

District Court, C.D. California · Jul 8, 2022

immunity because 24 there was no clearly established fact-specific precedent at the time of the incident 25 putting him on notice that his conduct was a constitutional violation. … entitled 26 to summary judgment on the excessive force claim because Lopez has no evidence to 27 support the second step of the qualified immunity analysis: whether there was clearly 28 established fact specific precedent

Nguon v. Wolf

517 F. Supp. 2d 1177 · District Court, C.D. California · Sep 25, 2007

Although the Court also found that Wolf was entitled to qualified immunity on the claim (MSJ Order, p. 15), the Court must now determine whether Charlene’s rights were violated for purposes of injunctive and declaratory relief … With regard to monetary damages, the Third Claim for Relief was dismissed as to the School Defendants on the basis of qualified immunity. (See Minute Order, Nov. 1, 2006 ["MSJ Order”], p. 15.) 7 .

Lowery v. Hauk

422 F. Supp. 490 · District Court, C.D. California · Nov 11, 1976

Plaintiff’s fourteen-page Complaint clearly meets this requirement. More fundamentally, it is a suit which, on its face, cannot be maintained against the sole defendant. … As observed by a distinguished English judge, it would establish the weakness of judicial authority in a degrading responsibility.

GemCap Lending, LLC v. Quarles & Brady, LLP

269 F. Supp. 3d 1007 · District Court, C.D. California · Sep 13, 2017

Because Plaintiff fails to' establish that any of those portions relate to Crop USA’s Disclosure Schedule—and more importantly, to the sections Plaintiff alleges were fraudulent—Plaintiff cannot rely on the ’“Knowledge Qualifier … As discussed, Defendants owed an independent duty not to defraud Plaintiff; thus, the agent’s immunity rule is inapplicable. However, Plaintiff fails' to establish a breach of this duty.

Miller v. Reddin

293 F. Supp. 216 · District Court, C.D. California · Nov 18, 1968

.: “Few doctrines were more solidly established at common law than the immunity of judges from liability for damages for acts committed within their judicial jurisdiction, as this Court recognized when it adopted the doctrine … The immunity of judges for acts within the judicial role is equally well established, and we presume that Congress would have specifically so provided had it wished to abolish the doctrine.”

United States Ex Rel. Giles v. Sardie

191 F. Supp. 2d 1117 · District Court, C.D. California · Jul 27, 2000

Giles argues in opposition that the Supreme Court’s treatment of the issue in Stevens falls short of establishing the principle that municipalities are immune from liability under section 3729(a) of the FCA. … The facts of the present case are clearly distinguishable from those in A-l Ambulance. In A-1 Ambulance, all of the material factual allegations that formed the basis of the complaint were publicly disclosed.

Lewis Operating Corp. v. United States

533 F. Supp. 2d 1041 · District Court, C.D. California · Jul 11, 2007

Here, there is no dispute that Plaintiffs should be considered PRPs unless they can establish that they meet the requirements for the “innocent landowner” defense. If so, they are immune from liability. … However, and more important to the instant case, the court in Carson Harbor clearly distinguished passive movement of contamination from the active movement that was addressed in Kaiser Aluminum.

Pyle v. Hatley

239 F. Supp. 2d 970 · District Court, C.D. California · Dec 10, 2002

Under these circumstances, plaintiff has clearly failed to establish this Court can exercise personal jurisdiction over defendant Dr. Jerry Howie. D. … Judicial Immunity: Judges are absolutely immune from suits for money damages for acts performed in their official capacities. Mireles v.

Bond v. United States

934 F. Supp. 351 · District Court, C.D. California · Jul 29, 1996

. § 14.9 (b) is not jurisdictional and does not supplant Congress’ statutory language establishing what constitutes a final denial. … Clearly a court following Glamer must assess the effect of § 14.9(b) when analyzing a plaintiffs argument for equitable tolling. III.

Gutierrez v. Solano

862 F. Supp. 2d 1037 · District Court, C.D. California · Jan 17, 2012

Qualified Immunity In support of qualified immunity for Detective Solano and Deputy Velasco, Defendants simply repeat that there was probable cause to arrest Plaintiff, and that the Detective and Deputy did not fabricate … The court therefore denies Defendants’ Motion as to qualified immunity. IV.

Recording Industry Ass'n of America, Inc. v. Diamond Multimedia Systems, Inc.

29 F. Supp. 2d 624 · District Court, C.D. California · Oct 26, 1998

To qualify as a DAR device, therefore, the Rio must be “capable of making” a reproduction of a “digital musical recording”. … Although Plaintiffs have established a probability that the Rio is a “digital audio recording device,” Plaintiffs have not established a probability of success in establishing that the Rio, if assessed by the Secretary of

Sayah v. United States

355 F. Supp. 1008 · District Court, C.D. California · Jan 29, 1973

Sindermann qualifies Roth by saying that where there is a reasonable expectancy of retention amounting to a quasi-con *1016 tract, then a property interest will attach. … It is clearly stated in the Regulation that a probationary employee is not promised a lasting job after one year, or even that he is guaranteed a full year’s stay. 12 It unambiguously sets forth a “watchful waiting” period

In re Circuit Breaker Litigation

984 F. Supp. 1267 · District Court, C.D. California · Apr 1, 1997

While the Court finds that these witnesses are qualified to provide expert testimony in an antitrust matter, 12 the Court does not believe that their testimony or findings are helpful to determining whether Plaintiffs’ non-immune … While Defendants’ experts testify that Plaintiffs’ activities injured Defendants, they do not establish by evidence the requisite causal connection between Plaintiffs’ non-immune activities and Defendants’ injuries.

Mel Marin v. Trustees of the Santa Barbara City College District, et al.

District Court, C.D. California · Jan 7, 2026

Plaintiff is cautioned that the Ninth Circuit recently affirmed a grant of qualified immunity to administrators of a California university, holding that California law did not clearly establish an interest … The Court need not accept as true such conclusory allegations and unreasonable 7 A plaintiff establishes the notice or knowledge element by showing that he “alerted the public entity to his need

Martinez v. United States

812 F. Supp. 2d 1052 · District Court, C.D. California · Sep 30, 2010

However, “[n]ot all unsuccessful cases qualify as a strike under § 1915(g).” Id. at 1121. … In particular, the United States has not waived its sovereign immunity for suits brought under the civil rights statutes, and such claims are barred by sovereign immunity. Davis v.

Christopher Todd Brown v. M. Soto

District Court, C.D. California · Jan 24, 2024

conduct “violate[s] clearly established statutory or constitutional rights.”   … However, Defendants would still be  21  entitled to qualified immunity if their argument that the right at issue was not clearly  22  established is correct.   23  “To be