Case law

(PC) Salas v. Allison

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 2, 2025

An official may be denied 1 qualified immunity only if “the clearly established right [violated is] defined with specificity. 2 . . . … This ensures that “[a]n officer is not entitled to 12 qualified immunity on the grounds that the law is not clearly established every time a novel 13 method is used to inflict injury.” Rodriguez v.

Macomber

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 8, 2025

Qualified Immunity 10 Government officials enjoy qualified immunity from civil damages unless their 11 conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional … Ordinarily, once the court 3 concludes that a right was clearly established, an officer is not entitled to qualified immunity 4 because a reasonably competent public official is charged with knowing the law governing

(PC) Lopez v. Praveen

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

Qualified Immunity 4 Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil liability where “their conduct 5 does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Feb. 11 15, 2024) (denying defendant’s motion for qualified immunity because inmates’ clearly 12 established right to be protected from serious, communicable diseases extends to protection from 13 COVID-19).

Elton Ward v. Bobi Griggs, Angela Vickers, Melanie Marino

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 14, 2026

Vickers asserts she is entitled to qualified immunity, as she was 26 acting as an auxiliary for law enforcement at the time of the exam, and her conduct was not 27 clearly unlawful. … Qualified Immunity Does Not Support Dismissal 7 In the alternative, Vickers argues that even if constitutional violations did occur, she is 8 protected from liability by qualified immunity.

Baugus v. Brunson

890 F. Supp. 908 · District Court, E.D. California · Jun 13, 1995

Section 1983 Longshore next argues that Baugus cannot establish his claim under § 1983. … This may very well be the case, but if Longshore were a federal officer he would not be entitled to the sovereign immunity of the United States. Only qualified immunity would be available to him. See Butz v.

Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Geithner

715 F. Supp. 2d 1051 · District Court, E.D. California · May 21, 2010

The Eleventh Amendment grants states sovereign immunity against suits in federal court. The State's sovereign immunity poses "a bar to federal jurisdiction over suits against non-consenting States." Alden v. … While § 107 *1065 is a tax exemption to be claimed by ministers, churches as employers clearly benefit by being able to pay their ministers more, for less.

Unite Here Local 19 v. Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians

101 F. Supp. 3d 929 · District Court, E.D. California · Mar 31, 2015

Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(c). 3 A motion for judgment on the pleadings should be granted only if “the moving party clearly establishes on the face of the pleadings that no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and that it is … Accordingly, Petitioner has clearly established on the face of the pleadings that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Ingrassia v. Chicken Ranch Bingo and Casino

676 F. Supp. 2d 953 · District Court, E.D. California · Dec 16, 2009

Plaintiffs assert that “no record has been presented to establish that the Casino operates as an arm of the Tribe” sufficient to warrant immunity. … Defendants have established their entitlement to tribal sovereign immunity. *958 B. Abrogation and Waiver The burden is thus on Plaintiffs to show waiver of immunity from suit.

Jamul Action Committee v. Chaudhuri

200 F. Supp. 3d 1042 · District Court, E.D. California · Aug 8, 2016

Whether the Tribe Can Be Joined and Whether the Tribe Is Indispensable The Tribe is a federally recognized Indian tribe entitled to sovereign immunity. It has not waived that immunity. … See, e.g., SAC ¶¶ 31-32 (“In 1978 the DOI adopted regulations outlining ‘Procedures for Establishing that an American Indian Group Exists as an Indian Tribe.’

Cotta v. County of Kings

79 F. Supp. 3d 1148 · District Court, E.D. California · Jan 7, 2015

The peace officer moved for summary judgment, asserting that he was entitled to qualified immunity. The district court denied the motion. … In rejecting the peace officer’s claim that he was entitled to qualified immunity, the Ninth Circuit noted that “clear precedent has established that a police officer violates the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause if

A. L. v. City of Bakersfield

District Court, E.D. California · Feb 24, 2025

Moreover, even 6 if district court decisions could clearly establish the law for purposes of qualified immunity, the 7 cases on which plaintiffs rely are insufficient.”) … Nov. 12, 2023 (“[T]he law regarding 11 failure to intervene is not clearly established and, on that theory, the deputies would be entitled to 12 qualified immunity.”) (citing cases).

Garcia v. City of Merced

637 F. Supp. 2d 731 · District Court, E.D. California · Jan 10, 2008

And because Merced City and Merced County cannot not establish that their employees are immune for liability, their immunity defense claims fails at the pleading stage. Cal.Gov.Code § 815.2(b). … While a municipality cannot be held liable under a respondeat superior, it is not afforded qualified immunity. Leatherman v.

Freedom from Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Geithner

715 F. Supp. 2d 1051 · District Court, E.D. California · May 21, 2010

The Eleventh Amendment grants states sovereign immunity against suits in federal court. The State’s sovereign immunity poses “a bar to federal jurisdiction over suits against non-consenting States.” Alden v. … While § 107 *1065 is a tax exemption to be claimed by ministers, churches as employers clearly benefit by being able to pay their ministers more, for less.

United States v. Toyota of Visalia

772 F. Supp. 481 · District Court, E.D. California · Jun 13, 1991

First of all, as Toyota acknowledges, Bothke does not involve Section 7433, but, rather, involves issues pertaining to qualified immunity. Toyota does not point out the subsequent history of Bothke . … It is noted that in the 1987 opinion the Ninth Circuit affirmed the decision of the district court that the IRS officer enjoyed qualified immunity.

Grosz v. Lassen Community College District

572 F. Supp. 2d 1199 · District Court, E.D. California · Aug 19, 2008

of the state” under the Eleventh Amendment, are immune from liability. … Here, Grosz and Leao can meet the second prong by pleading facts demonstrating they were terminated from a job for which they were qualified. 22 .

Miller v. Ceres Unified School District

141 F. Supp. 3d 1038 · District Court, E.D. California · Oct 28, 2015

California’s argument that Congress’s power must be limited to the protection of those classes found by the Court to deserve ‘special protection’ under the Constitution”); Phiffer, 384 F.3d at 792 (9th Cir.2004) (“Our precedent clearly … To plead a prima facie Title II or Section 504 case, Plaintiff must prove as follows: (1) he is an individual with a disability; (2) he is otherwise qualified to participate in or receive the benefit of a public entity’s

(PC) Borowiec v. Jones

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 3, 2025

Finally, defendant contends that he is entitled to qualified immunity because he did 13 not violate any clearly established constitutional right that “mandate[d] individualized warnings 14 to potential victims of inmate … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818–19 (1982)). 28 Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity when their “conduct does not 1 violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

Adams

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

“The doctrine of qualified 7 immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct ‘does not violate 8 clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person 9 would have … “[D]ismissal is not appropriate unless we can 14 determine, based on the complaint itself, that qualified immunity applies.”

Mohsin v. California Department of Water Resources

52 F. Supp. 3d 1006 · District Court, E.D. California · Oct 1, 2014

In what has become known as part of the Ex parte Young doctrine, a suit for prospective injunctive relief provides a narrow, but well-established, exception to Eleventh Amendment immunity”) (internal citations omitted). … Defendants offer multiple documents for judicial notice to demonstrate that the claims are time-barred, but none clearly states the date the notice of rejection was deposited in the mail. (ECF No. 9-2.)

Watts v. County of Sacramento

65 F. Supp. 2d 1111 · District Court, E.D. California · Sep 21, 1999

Were the court to reach the defense of qualified immunity, the uncertainty in the Ninth Circuit law on this question would be important. 3 . … An officer is entitled to qualified immunity if his action was objectively reasonable "in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time it was taken.” Chew v.