Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filterscaed

6,306 results

0.48s

  • Calamco v. J.R. Simplot Co.

    District Court, E.D. California · Dec 5, 2024

    If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, 10 the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate 11 markings in the margins). … If 21 only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 22 must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). 23

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • (PC) Samaniego v. CDCR

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

    In 15 addition, Defendants contend “Sullivan and Pfeiffer are entitled to qualified immunity for any claims 16 asserted against them.” (Id.) … entitled to qualified immunity.” 7 (Doc. 33 at 7.)

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • (PC) Jeffrey T. Eastman v. Westbrook

    District Court, E.D. California · Sep 27, 2021

    Plaintiff’s pre-medical immune disorder was not taken into 1 consideration. … City of Ellensburg, 869 F.2d 1230, 1233-34 (9th Cir. 1989) (single incident 11 of excessive force inadequate to establish liability), Meehan v.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • (PS) Greek v. United States

    District Court, E.D. California · Jan 25, 2021

    The United States, as sovereign, can only be sued to the extent it has waived its 15 sovereign immunity. … Claims for declaratory relief (Declaratory Judgment Act) 23 In contrast to the barely identifiable claim for damages, the FAC clearly requests 24 numerous forms of declaratory relief.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • (PS) Van den Heuvel v. Starbucks Coffee

    District Court, E.D. California · Apr 10, 2024

    SCREENING 22 A determination that a plaintiff qualifies financially for in forma pauperis status does not 23 complete the inquiry required by the statute. … In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the 8 court will (1) accept as true all of the factual allegations contained in the complaint, unless they 9 are clearly baseless or fanciful, (2) construe those allegations

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Haines

    District Court, E.D. California · Oct 7, 2025

    Except as otherwise provided in this Order, 21 or as otherwise stipulated or ordered, Disclosure or Discovery Material that qualifies for 22 protection under this Order must be clearly so designated before the material … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 11 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) 12 (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins), if

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Booza

    District Court, E.D. California · Dec 30, 2025

    The 27 requisite causal connection can be established not only by some kind of direct personal 28 participation in the deprivation, but also by setting in motion a series of acts by others which the 1 actor knows or … The asserted immunity does not apply here. 15 Defendant correctly notes that the Ninth Circuit has made clear that “[a] witness has absolute 16 immunity from liability for civil damages under § 1983 for giving perjured

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Ruiz v. Aragon

    District Court, E.D. California · Sep 20, 2023

    Eleventh Amendment Immunity 16 In general, the Eleventh Amendment bars suits against a state, absent the state’s 17 affirmative waiver of its immunity or congressional abrogation of … that immunity.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • (PC) Jones v. Bonta

    District Court, E.D. California · Dec 6, 2024

    to waive its sovereign immunity 22 or Congress abrogates it. … To establish a violation of this duty, a 21 prisoner must “show that the officials acted with deliberate indifference to threat of serious harm 22 or injury to an inmate.”

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Campbell v. PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS, LLP

    602 F. Supp. 2d 1163 · District Court, E.D. California · Mar 11, 2009

    In the endeavor to establish the existence of a factual dispute, the opposing party need not establish a material issue of fact conclusively in its favor. … Moreover, the various agency interpretive documents do not explicitly or clearly speak to this question.

    Reversed in part, on other grounds by Campbell v. PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS, LLP, 642 F.3d 820 (2011)Cited 7 timesPublished
  • (PS) Edison v. Huneke

    District Court, E.D. California · May 2, 2022

    However, a determination that a plaintiff qualifies financially for in forma 4 pauperis status does not complete the inquiry required by the statute. … time if the allegation of 16 poverty is found to be untrue or if it is determined that the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to 17 state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against an immune

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Fust v. Gilead Sciences, Inc.

    District Court, E.D. California · Feb 22, 2024

    This is not enough. 7 “Once CAFA jurisdiction has been established . . . the burden 8 falls on the party seeking remand . . . to show that an exception 9 to CAFA jurisdiction applies. … However, it is unclear to the court 16 why Sonner would vitiate the court’s already-established CAFA 17 jurisdiction. (See supra § I.A.)

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • (PS)Lewis v. Wellspace Health

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

    SCREENING 22 A determination that a plaintiff qualifies financially for in forma pauperis status does not 23 complete the inquiry required by the statute. … IFP statute requires federal courts to 24 dismiss a case if the action is legally “frivolous or malicious,” fails to state a claim upon which 25 relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Richson-Bey v. Palmer

    District Court, E.D. California · Jun 29, 2023

    Thus, to 10 comply with Rule 8, a complaint should clearly and fully set forth “who is being sued, for what 11 relief, and on what theory, with enough detail to guide discovery.” Id. … Prosecutorial Immunity 20 It is well established that a prosecutor enjoys absolute immunity from suits for damages 21 when he acts within the scope of his prosecutorial duties

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Tri Tool, Inc. v. Hales

    District Court, E.D. California · Dec 21, 2022

    If only a portion or portions of the 16 material 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) and … This 11 provision is not intended to modify whatever procedure may be established in an e-discovery 12 order that provides for production without prior privilege review.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Muchhala v. United States

    532 F. Supp. 2d 1215 · District Court, E.D. California · Feb 6, 2007

    The FTCA is a limited waiver of sovereign immunity which preserves the immunity of the United States from tort liability in a number of circumstances. … Specifically, an “activity” may qualify as a “sport” for purposes of the primary assumption of the risk doctrine if the activity is done for enjoyment or thrill, requires physical exertion as well as elements of skill, and

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • (PS) Powell v. United States

    District Court, E.D. California · Apr 29, 2024

    P. 12(h)(3). 8 The United States is immune from suit for damages except where Congress has 9 specifically waived its immunity. See Lehman v. Nakshian, 453 U.S. 156, 160 (1981). … In this way, too, plaintiff fails to establish the court’s jurisdiction, 9 and the suit must be dismissed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3). 10 III.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • (PC) Legare v. Burden

    District Court, E.D. California · Aug 6, 2020

    or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are 10 legally “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or 11 that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Defendant Kim and others denied 19 Plaintiff adequate, basic, lawful treatment that he begged for in writing. 20 Defendants have clearly displayed a shameful disregard toward Plaintiff’s deadly 21 disease, particularly

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • (PC) Uriel Garcia v. Powell

    District Court, E.D. California · Apr 23, 2025

    medical care, that he has demonstrated that Defendants 18 caused him harm by their delay, and that Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity. 19 Defendants’ Reply to Plaintiff’s Opposition (Doc. 65 … As a result, it elects to forego an analysis of 12 Defendants’ affirmative defense of qualified immunity. 13 IV.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Mendoza

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

    If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for 17 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate 18 markings in the margins). … If only a portion or portions of the 25 material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) 26 (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.