Case law

Araceli Saldana De Gomez v. Kilolo Kijakazi

District Court, C.D. California · Sep 28, 2023

Defendant has a point; certainly plaintiff’s argument could have been more clearly 27 articulated. … Colvin, 19 759 F.3d 995, 1015 (9th Cir. 2014) (steroid shots generally do not qualify as 20 conservative treatment).

Mona Salcida Murillo v. D. Godfrey

District Court, C.D. California · Mar 9, 2020

It is well 16 || established that, in some circumstances, officers may restrain inmates to maintain 17 || order. See Mendiola-Martinez v. … that § 1983 was not intended to abrogate a State's Eleventh 5 Amendment immunity.”)

International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 848 v. MV Transportation, Inc.

District Court, C.D. California · Aug 26, 2020

In fact, according to Local 848, it has been MV’s practice to bargain with any employee unit proposed by an IBT affiliate, whether or not that employee unit is clearly covered by the NMA or NCCNA. Id. … To the extent Local 848 contends it is unclear which persons qualify as “regular part-time drivers,” it is clear to the Court that that term cannot apply to the five non-driver employees at MV who are classified

Janine Angel v. Cindy Marten

District Court, C.D. California · Jun 15, 2023

Plaintiffs 4 Each of the Student Plaintiffs in this action is a “qualified individual with a 5 disability” under 42 U.S.C. § 12131(2) and is accordingly entitled … Moreover, closing 18 schools is clearly rationally related to curbing the spread of COVID-19. Accordingly, 19 Plaintiffs’ constitutional claims fail.

Kaneka Corp. v. SKC Kolon PI, Inc.

198 F. Supp. 3d 1089 · District Court, C.D. California · Aug 2, 2016

A new trial may be granted “only if the verdict is so clearly against the weight of evidence as to amount to a manifest miscarriage of justice.” Id.; accord E.E.O.C. v. … The peculiarities of the intersection of patent law and the relevant parties’ international configura *1109 tion should not immunize SKPI from liability. Accord Wing Shing [Products (BVI), Ltd. v.

Lucia Madrigal v. Andrew Saul

District Court, C.D. California · Mar 4, 2021

Lee Silver, an orthopedist serving as 21 a Qualified Medical Examiner in her workers’ compensation case. (AR 735-743.) … Such intentional repetitive neck motion is 25 clearly inconsistent with Dr. Lee’s restriction to no repetitive cervical spine movements. (AR 26 743.)

William Alkurdi v. Martin O'Malley

District Court, C.D. California · Nov 15, 2023

(AR 22). 19 The ALJ thus concluded that Plaintiff had not established that his knee pain 20 was a medically determinable impairment. … The record may 17 not reflect a definitive diagnosis—but the Ninth Circuit has not clearly required 18 a definitive diagnosis either. See Ortiz v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 425 F.

James C. Howe v. Martin Gamboa

District Court, C.D. California · Mar 1, 2022

As to 9 the Eighth Amendment, Petitioner does not cite, and the Court is not aware of, 10 any clearly established federal law holding that, for inmates serving 11 indeterminate life sentences, continued confinement … Thus, even if the petitioner qualifies for an 2 exception to the AEDPA’s bar on claims raised in successive petitions, he must 3 still receive authorization from the Ninth Circuit before filing a petition in the 4 district

Samanatha Shaunee Brown v. Western First Aid & Safety

District Court, C.D. California · Feb 6, 2025

Under the joint employer doctrine, separate business entities can both qualify as employers if they “share control of the terms [or] conditions of an individual’s employment.” Johnson v. … Western First Aid & Safety et al In opposition, plaintiff argues that she has clearly satisfied the pleading standard for this claim because her allegations are more robust than those in defendants’ cited case

Zayin Zari Bey v. Los Angeles County Sheriff Department

District Court, C.D. California · Dec 11, 2020

Lovett, 328 U.S. 303, 315 (1946)). 28 Three requirements must be met to establish a violation of the bill of 1 attainder clause: “[S]pecification of the affected persons, punishment, and 2 lack of a … If Plaintiff chooses to file a First Amended Complaint, 8 he must clearly designate on the face of the document that it is the “First Amended 9 Complaint.”

Jacob Gleason v. Princess Cruise Lines, Ltd.

District Court, C.D. California · Jul 14, 2020

The risk of exposing individuals to COVID-19 is not unique to cruise ships—dquite the contrary, in fact, as restaurants, bars, churches, factories, nursing homes, prisons, and other establishments across the country continue … Setting aside concerns with qualified immunity, the Eleventh Amendment, and the like, can a prisoner recover for NIED against the prison based solely on their proximity to individuals with COVID-19 and their fear of contracting

Christopher Chao v. Princess Cruise Line, Ltd.

District Court, C.D. California · Jul 14, 2020

The risk of exposing individuals to COVID-19 is not unique to cruise ships—dquite the contrary, in fact, as restaurants, bars, churches, factories, nursing homes, prisons, and other establishments across the country continue … Setting aside concerns with qualified immunity, the Eleventh Amendment, and the like, can a prisoner recover for NIED against the prison based solely on their proximity to individuals with COVID-19 and their fear of contracting

Steven Kurivial v. Princess Cruise Lines Ltd

District Court, C.D. California · Jul 14, 2020

The risk of exposing individuals to COVID-19 is not unique to cruise ships—dquite the contrary, in fact, as restaurants, bars, churches, factories, nursing homes, prisons, and other establishments across the country continue … Setting aside concerns with qualified immunity, the Eleventh Amendment, and the like, can a prisoner recover for NIED against the prison based solely on their proximity to individuals with COVID-19 and their fear of contracting

Sharon Lane v. Princess Cruise Lines Ltd

District Court, C.D. California · Jul 14, 2020

The risk of exposing individuals to COVID-19 is not unique to cruise ships—dquite the contrary, in fact, as restaurants, bars, churches, factories, nursing homes, prisons, and other establishments across the country continue … Setting aside concerns with qualified immunity, the Eleventh Amendment, and the like, can a prisoner recover for NIED against the prison based solely on their proximity to individuals with COVID-19 and their fear of contracting

Robert James v. Princess Cruise Lines Ltd

District Court, C.D. California · Jul 14, 2020

The risk of exposing individuals to COVID-19 is not unique to cruise ships—dquite the contrary, in fact, as restaurants, bars, churches, factories, nursing homes, prisons, and other establishments across the country continue … Setting aside concerns with qualified immunity, the Eleventh Amendment, and the like, can a prisoner recover for NIED against the prison based solely on their proximity to individuals with COVID-19 and their fear of contracting

Brian Sheedy v. Princess Criuse Lines, Ltd.

District Court, C.D. California · Jul 14, 2020

The risk of exposing individuals to COVID-19 is not unique to cruise ships—dquite the contrary, in fact, as restaurants, bars, churches, factories, nursing homes, prisons, and other establishments across the country continue … Setting aside concerns with qualified immunity, the Eleventh Amendment, and the like, can a prisoner recover for NIED against the prison based solely on their proximity to individuals with COVID-19 and their fear of contracting

Robert Jacobsen v. Princess Cruise Lines Ltd.

District Court, C.D. California · Jul 14, 2020

The risk of exposing individuals to COVID-19 is not unique to cruise ships—dquite the contrary, in fact, as restaurants, bars, churches, factories, nursing homes, prisons, and other establishments across the country continue … Setting aside concerns with qualified immunity, the Eleventh Amendment, and the like, can a prisoner recover for NIED against the prison based solely on their proximity to individuals with COVID-19 and their fear of contracting

Taylor Farms California, Inc. v. Coopers Cold Food, Inc.

District Court, C.D. California · Aug 9, 2021

Counsel have an obligation to 8 lay out their support clearly. Carmen v. San Francisco Sch. … Cooper Cold Foods does not dispute that Monterey Mushrooms is a valid PACA 17 trust beneficiary, that Cooper Cold Foods qualifies

Dennis Dale Catchings v. City of Santa Monica

District Court, C.D. California · Feb 3, 2022

An Adequate Record For Review Plaintiff has previously filed numerous civil rights cases for money damages in the Central District of California clearly challenging the validity of his … Hartmarx Corp., 496 U.S. 384, 395 (1990) (district court can impose sanctions after plaintiff voluntarily dismisses action because “[i]t is well established that a federal court may consider collateral issues after an

Donaldo Galaz v. People of The State of California

District Court, C.D. California · Sep 11, 2024

Rule 4 also permits courts to 5 dismiss claims “that are clearly not cognizable.” Id. … Lee, 578 U.S. 605, 609 (2016) (per curiam) (Dixon rule “qualifies as adequate to 11 bar federal habeas review”).