Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
6,306 results
1.94s
891 F. Supp. 2d 1149 · District Court, E.D. California · Aug 29, 2012
Qualified Immunity Alternatively, defendant James seeks qualified immunity on plaintiffs constitutional claims. … A defendant is entitled to qualified immunity if his conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v.
Cited 1 timesPublishedHardesty v. Sacramento Metro. Air Quality Mgmt. Dist.
307 F. Supp. 3d 1010 · District Court, E.D. California · Mar 31, 2018
Thus, Dickinson is not entitled to absolute immunity. 2. Qualified Immunity Defendants also contend they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Renewed JMOL Mot. at 63. a) Standard Qualified immunity "protects government officials 'from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of
Cited 1 timesPublished374 F. Supp. 3d 961 · District Court, E.D. California · Mar 8, 2019
The plaintiff retains the burden to establish the court's subject matter jurisdiction. Id. (citing Colwell v. Dep't of Health & Human Servs. , 558 F.3d 1112 , 1121 (9th Cir. 2009) ). … Supervisory-Level "Burn Boss" Plaintiff argues that PMS 484, explained below, mandated USFS to have a "qualified burn boss supervising and monitoring Meow 175" and that "[t]he only qualified burn boss left for vacation the
Cited 3 timesPublishedRedick v. Sonora Police Department
District Court, E.D. California · Oct 12, 2021
City of Orange, 485 F.3d 463, 476 (9th Cir. 2007) (Stating it was “clearly 18 established long ago that an officer may not conduct a warrantless arrest absent probable 19 cause.”). … establish 13 defamation under state law.”
Cited 0 timesUnknown244 F. Supp. 3d 1073 · District Court, E.D. California · Feb 10, 2017
If the source of the search warrant affidavit were not a Cl, the plaintiff would clearly be entitled to depose that person. … immunity because “[viewing the facts in the light most favorable to Kennedy, we find that, if accepted as true, they are sufficient to establish that Shields [the police officer] acted deliberately and indifferently to the
Cited 0 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. California · Oct 28, 2021
Qualified Immunity 7 “[G]overnment officials performing discretionary functions [are entitled to] a 8 qualified immunity, shielding them from civil damages liability … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982) (holding that government 22 officials are immune so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional 23 rights of which a reasonable person would have known
Cited 0 timesUnknown167 F. Supp. 3d 1117 · District Court, E.D. California · Mar 8, 2016
clearly established. … Finding relevant law clearly established, the Court thus concludes that Defendants Sword, Almanza, Brock, Stephens, Miller, Phillips, and Bright are not entitled to qualified immunity as to Plaintiffs’ first cause of action
Cited 43 timesPublishedDoe v. Benicia Unified School District
206 F. Supp. 2d 1048 · District Court, E.D. California · Apr 22, 2002
As an initial matter, defendants assert that qualified immunity shields them from liability for Aparicio’s conduct. … Therefore, defendants’ argument fails: if the Taylor factors are met, then qualified immunity will not shield them from liability.
Cited 2 timesPublished98 F. Supp. 3d 1103 · District Court, E.D. California · Apr 2, 2015
With respect to qualified immunity, the law was sufficiently established that a reasonable officer would have known that the City officers’ actions were improper. … If the officer could have reasonably, but mistakenly, believed that his conduct did not violate a clearly established constitutional right, then the officer will receive qualified immunity.
Cited 11 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. California · Aug 19, 2024
Legal Standards 16 “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil 17 damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … establish that any allegedly 7 violated right was clearly established.
Cited 0 timesUnknown93 Daily Journal DAR 2776 · District Court, E.D. California · Feb 2, 1993
OVERVIEW The requested material is clearly relevant to plaintiffs cause of action. … (hereafter “HCQIA” or the “Act”) does not establish such a broad based privilege. 6 It does accord antitrust liability immunity to medical “professional review” participants whose actions conform to the standards of the Act
Cited 40 timesPublishedGreenlow v. California Department of Benefit Payments
413 F. Supp. 420 · District Court, E.D. California · Jan 16, 1976
Scheuer held that immunity of members of the executive branch, unlike that of the judicial branch, is not absolute, but qualified. … Because the immunity conferred was only qualified the Court held that “[fjinal resolution of this question must take into account the functions and responsibilities of these particular defendants in their capacities as officers
Cited 5 timesPublished750 F. Supp. 2d 1148 · District Court, E.D. California · Sep 30, 2010
Claims for Relief Defendants ask the Court to dismiss the Complaint based on the Defendants’ absolute and qualified immunity and based on Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). … The Court will first analyze the immunity arguments because absolute and qualified immunity are intended to provide “immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability.” Mitchell v.
Cited 5 timesPublishedRedick v. Sonora Police Department
District Court, E.D. California · Aug 10, 2021
City of Orange, 2 485 F.3d 463, 476 (9th Cir. 2007) (Stating it was “clearly established long ago that an officer 3 may not conduct a warrantless arrest absent probable cause.”). … establish 21 defamation under state law.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownCalifornia Independent System Operator Corp. v. Reliant Energy Services, Inc.
181 F. Supp. 2d 1111 · District Court, E.D. California · Mar 21, 2001
Clearly, the FERC is an agency with special expertise concerning the ISO Tariff. … Reliant reads the Lazar holding far too broadly- In Lazar, the Ninth Circuit discussed the extent to which a state waives its immunity by filing a proof of claim in bankruptcy, as established in Gardner v.
Cited 56 timesPublishedRedick v. Sonora Police Department
District Court, E.D. California · May 14, 2021
City of Orange, 4 485 F.3d 463, 476 (9th Cir. 2007) (Stating it was “clearly established long ago that an officer 5 may not conduct a warrantless arrest absent probable cause.”). … establish 7 defamation under state law.”
Cited 0 timesUnknown819 F. Supp. 2d 937 · District Court, E.D. California · May 16, 2011
Qualified Immunity To determine whether qualified immunity applies, the threshold question is whether, in the light most favorable to the party asserting injury, the facts show an officer’s conduct violated a constitutional … Sunn and similar cases only permit entity liability -under Monell where there was a constitutional injury but the individual officer is entitled to qualified immunity because the right that was violated was not clearly established
Cited 17 timesPublishedCity of Sacramento v. Secretary of Housing & Urban Development
363 F. Supp. 736 · District Court, E.D. California · May 22, 1972
Burr, 309 U.S. 242 , 60 S.Ct. 488 , 84 L.Ed. 724 (1940), the Supreme Court pointed out that the power given in this section to sue the Secretary should be “liberally construed” and denied only in suits which are clearly “ … Viewed in perspective, the City’s action falls clearly outside of the consent to suit.
Cited 8 timesPublishedRedick v. Sonora Police Department
District Court, E.D. California · Mar 17, 2021
City of Orange, 4 485 F.3d 463, 476 (9th Cir. 2007) (Stating it was “clearly established long ago that an officer 5 may not conduct a warrantless arrest absent probable cause.”). … establish 17 defamation under state law.”
Cited 0 timesUnknown(PS) Alston v. City of Sacramento
District Court, E.D. California · Oct 11, 2023
Qualified Immunity 16 Government officials are immune “from liability for civil damages insofar as their 17 conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … For purposes of qualified immunity, the dispositive 22 question is whether it was clearly established that under these circumstances, it violated the 23 Fourth Amendment to detain someone who failed to follow directions
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna