Case law

Layla Suggett v. Kamman, et al.

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 27, 2026

However, the non-moving party is not required to establish a material 7 issue of fact conclusively in its favor; it is sufficient that “the claimed factual dispute be shown to 8 require a jury or judge to resolve the … They also contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Quintanar, Jr. v. County of Stanislaus

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 11, 2023

” ( ) The ultimate warrant was a 325-page “unorganized, rambling 3 document” that failed to establish probable cause. … Prosecutorial Immunity under Cal.

Hernandez

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 16, 2026

If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for 10 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making 11 appropriate markings in the margins). … This provision is not intended to 4 modify whatever procedure may be established in an e-discovery order that provides for production 5 without prior privilege review.

(PC) Singh v. CDCR

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 13, 2025

or dismiss the complaint, or any portion 8 of the complaint, if the complaint “is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which 9 relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Thus, § 1915(e)(2) 18 allows judges to dismiss a claim based on factual allegations that are clearly baseless, such as 19 facts describing “fantastic or delusional scenarios.”

Jimenez

District Court, E.D. California · Nov 17, 2025

If only a portion or portions of the material on a 22 page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 23 portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). … If only a 5 portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 6 must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the 7 margins).

Sanders v. Deputy District Attorney V. Lai

District Court, E.D. California · Nov 2, 2020

“The requisite causal connection may be established when an 13 official sets in motion a ‘series of acts by others which the actor knows or reasonably should 14 know would cause others to inflict’ constitutional harms … “Absolute immunity fails to 23 attach to judicial officers only when they act clearly and completely outside the scope of their 24 jurisdiction.” Id.; see also Puentes v. Cty. of San Mateo, No.

(PC) Rodriguez v. Pfeiffer

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

The KVSP nursing staff was not qualified by education, training, or state licensing to act in 20 this position. (Id.) … 16 immunity because they are sued in their official capacities.

United States v. Hempfling

431 F. Supp. 2d 1069 · District Court, E.D. California · Feb 22, 2006

The validity of the Sixteenth Amendment has long been established. … one does not have Noerr-Pennington immunity is to conclude that one’s petitioning activity is unprotected by the First Amendment.

(PC) Caesar v. Beard

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 16, 2019

immunity.1 (ECF 26 No. 17.) … Qualified Immunity 4 Defendants also assert that the Court should grant summary judgment on the basis of 5 qualified immunity.

(PS) Wenzler v. Sacramento Superior Court

District Court, E.D. California · Oct 28, 2024

Eleventh Amendment immunity 18 extends to the Sacramento County Superior Court. … Because the only named defendant is immune 19 from suit, this case cannot proceed. 20 Second, the complaint fails to establish a basis for federal jurisdiction.

Rudolph v. Herc Rentals, Inc.

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 6, 2022

If only a portion 20 or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 21 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). 22 … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for 2 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making 3 appropriate markings in the margins).

(PS) Johnson v. U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 21, 2021

As a sovereign, the United 15 States is immune from suit unless it has waived that immunity. United States v. … Ct. at 1860 (listing nonexhaustive examples of differences that would 20 qualify as “meaningful”). 21 In applying the step-two “special factors” analysis, courts are instructed

(PC) Padilla v. Patel

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 21, 2020

Hitchman knew he should have referred 24 Plaintiff to the doctor for follow-up because Hitchman knew he was not qualified to diagnosis 25 Plaintiff’s knee condition. … “[E]ven gross negligence is insufficient to establish a 6 constitutional violation.” Id. (citing Wood v.

(PS) Henreid v. Haynes

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 15, 2025

Judicially noticed government records establish 21 that the Representations are not true. Id. … Defendants have demonstrated that 6 the FAC’s arguments are clearly not “warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument 7 for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law[,]” and

(PC) McCullom v. Moore

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 8, 2022

Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409, 431 (1976), and although public defenders 28 are not entitled to immunity, it is well-established that a public defender is not a person who acts 1 “under color of law” within the meaning of § … Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (holding that a complaint is 8 frivolous if its “factual contentions are clearly baseless,” “fantastic,” or “delusional”).

Taylor v. IRS

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 11, 2023

If a plaintiff 11 cannot establish that its action against the United States falls within a waiver of sovereign 12 immunity, the action must be dismissed. See Dunn & Black, P.S. v. … Cal. 2020), appeal 1 Act established a tax credit for eligible individuals in the amount of $1,200 ($2,400 if filing a 2 joint return), plus $500 multiplied by the number of qualifying children. 26 U.S.C. § 6428(a)

(PC) Price v. Barnes

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 22, 2020

immunity. … As 26 discussed below, summary judgment is appropriate on that basis and therefore the court does not 27 reach the separate argument based on qualified immunity. 28 /////

(PC) Negron v. White

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

A 20 plaintiff must establish: (1) a serious medical need; and (2) deliberate indifference to that need by 21 prison officials. See McGuckin v. … Hammond, 14 821 F.3d 1085, 1092 (9th Cir. 2016) (internal quotations and citations omitted) (evaluating merits 15 of Eighth Amendment claim in context of qualified immunity).

Regalado

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 2, 2026

If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 10 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) 11 (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). … If only a portion or portions of the material 20 on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 21 portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins).

Goding v. Gravity Cartel, LLC

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 17, 2019

Order must be clearly so designated before the material is disclosed or 10 produced. … If only a portion or portions of the material 16 on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the 17 protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins).