Case law

(PC) Dixon v. Oleachea

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 18, 2020

Qualified Immunity and Merits of Excessive Force Claim 10 1. … Qualified Immunity 13 Government officials are immune from civil damages “unless their conduct violates 14 ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

(PS)Crane v. Juhasz

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 30, 2021

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY 13 Defendants assert they are entitled to qualified immunity to the extent the SAC pleads 14 facts involving the individual defendants’ liability for the … denial of a building inspection. 15 Defendants argue qualified immunity is warranted because a reasonable city official would not 16 understand the decision not to inspect a building could be unlawful.

Louis Doon McClellan v. El Dorado County Sheriff’s Office, et al.

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 19, 2026

In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the 22 court accepts as true the factual allegations contained in the complaint, unless they are clearly 23 baseless or fanciful, and construes those allegations in the light … For Plaintiff to prevail on a Fourth Amendment 18 Claim, he must establish that the seizure of property was unreasonable.

Timbisha Shoshone Tribe v. Salazar

697 F. Supp. 2d 1181 · District Court, E.D. California · Mar 16, 2010

Plaintiffs’ argue that “[t]aking eight (8) months to reorganize the administrative record when such record should have already been organized clearly constitutes unreasonable delay. … However, “intangible injuries, such as damage to ... goodwill qualify as irreparable harm.” Rent-A-Center, Inc. v. Canyon Television & Appliance Rental, Inc., 944 F.2d 597, 603 (9th Cir.1991).

Phoebe Dacha v. Medical Board of California and Reji Varghese

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

In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the court will 28 (1) accept as true all of the factual allegations contained in the complaint, unless they are clearly 1 baseless or fanciful, (2) construe those allegations … from suit. 21 There is a line of “well-established case law holding medical board officials entitled to absolute 22 immunity for their quasi-judicial and quasi-prosecutorial functions.”

(PC) Dixson v. Haile

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 26, 2022

Defendants also contend that they are entitled to qualified 3 immunity because they acted reasonably in providing plaintiff with medical care. … Accordingly, the undersigned recommends 19 granting defendant’s summary judgment on the additional grounds of qualified immunity. 20 VI.

(PC) Cantu v. Ward

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 1, 2021

No. 9 at 4.) 21 Plaintiff’s second objection to the findings and recommendations addresses the 22 requirements for a defendant’s entitlement to qualified immunity. (Doc. … However, 23 the assigned magistrate judge did not rely on qualified immunity in the findings and 24 recommendations. (See Doc.

J.M. v. United States of America

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 11, 2026

Trustee, 327 8 F.3d 903, 907 (9th Cir. 2003) (“The United States, as a sovereign, is immune from suit unless it 9 has waived its immunity.”). … The basis of a Bivens action is 21 some illegal or inappropriate conduct on the part of a federal official or agent that violates a clearly 22 established constitutional right. Baiser v.

(PS) Chiu v. Trump

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 25, 2025

SCREENING 22 A determination that a plaintiff qualifies financially for in forma pauperis status does not 23 complete the inquiry required by the statute. … There is no clearly identifiable 5 incident that forms the basis of the complaint. No causes of action are asserted. The sentences in 6 the complaint do not make sense.

Goodwin v. State Farm Insurance

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 28, 2025

Stahl, 254 F.3d 845 (9th Cir. 2001) (dismissal required of in forma pauperis proceedings which seek monetary relief from immune defendants); Cato v. … Even assuming Plaintiff’s allegation that he has 5 ADHD and PTSD is sufficient to show he is an individual with a qualified disability under the 6 ADA, Plaintiff’s complaint does not clearly allege the remaining elements

Walmart

District Court, E.D. California · May 21, 2026

In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the 18 court accepts as true the factual allegations contained in the complaint, unless they are clearly 19 baseless or fanciful, and construes those allegations in the light … Plaintiff does not allege a sum of monetary damages, however, if she were to do 16 so she could establish that her claims are between two parties from different states as the address 17 listed on the Complaint is from

Fairall

District Court, E.D. California · May 26, 2026

Moreover, it is 15 unclear from the face of the Complaint whether there is diversity of citizenship among the parties. 16 Plaintiff may litigate his claims in federal court if he can establish diversity of citizenship … If 1 | plaintiff elects to file an amended complaint, it shall be clearly captioned “First Amended 2 || Complaint” and shall cure the deficiencies identified herein.

Brave and Free Santa Cruz v. Aragon

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 12, 2025

Id. at § 120335(h) (“This 16 section does not prohibit a pupil who qualifies for an individualized education program, pursuant 17 to federal law and § 56026 of the Education Code, from accessing any special education … An actual case or 13 controversy will be held to exist when a plaintiff establishes standing. Lujan v.

(HC) Wong v. Samuel

District Court, E.D. California · Nov 28, 2023

federal habeas relief under clearly established federal law. … ’s conclusion that the Supreme Court has 19 never held that a trial court has the obligation or authority to grant such immunity.

(PC) Garland v. CDCR

District Court, E.D. California · Nov 8, 2023

First, the pleadings do not 21 establish that plaintiff was a qualified individual with a disability. … Plaintiff is advised that in 27 an amended complaint he must clearly identify each defendant and the action that defendant took 28 that violated his constitutional rights.

(PC) Johnson v. Solano County Public Defenders Office

District Court, E.D. California · May 3, 2021

The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an 12 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 13 490 U.S. at 327. … Public Defenders are Immune 12 A defendant has “‘the right to be represented by an otherwise qualified attorney whom 13 that defendant can afford to hire, or who is willing to represent

(PS) McDonald v. Department of Motor Vehicles

District Court, E.D. California · Nov 2, 2021

However, a determination that a plaintiff qualifies financially for in forma 4 pauperis status does not complete the inquiry required by the statute. … Under this standard, a court must dismiss a 21 complaint as frivolous where it is based on an indisputably meritless legal theory or where the 22 factual contentions are clearly baseless.

National Agricultural Chemicals Ass'n v. Rominger

500 F. Supp. 465 · District Court, E.D. California · Sep 19, 1980

Subsection (a) by its terms clearly provides that the state may impose stricter regulations than those imposed under federal law. … The allegations challenge the decentralized use permit process insofar as it permits the local agricultural commissioner to grant, deny or qualify the application of the product by the user.

(PC) Humes v. Becerra

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 3, 2021

Only the most disabling of conditions, we 3 emphasize, would qualify under the standard we announce today. … Defendant’s claimed depression clearly did not satisfy this standard.

WCAB

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 24, 2026

In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the 14 court will (1) accept as true all of the factual allegations contained in the complaint, unless they 15 are clearly baseless or fanciful, (2) construe those allegations … Plaintiff must 8 | allege facts establishing a basis for venue in this District.