Case law

Coalition for a Sustainable Delta v. JOHN McCAMMAN

725 F. Supp. 2d 1162 · District Court, E.D. California · Jul 21, 2010

Rather, State Defendants seek to qualify and/or explain those statements. For example, Plaintiffs assert that Mr. … Souza claims no expertise that qualifies him to opine on these subjects.

Lemongas Enterprises, Inc. v. The City of Bakersfield

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

Texas Dep’t of Highways & Public Transp., 483 U.S. 468, 473-74 (1987) (a state’s 9 waiver of sovereign immunity in its court does not effect a waiver of its Eleventh Amendment 10 immunity in federal courts). … Plaintiffs’ eminent domain, CTCA 13 violation, and FTCA violation claims fail to establish subject-matter jurisdiction.

FPI Management, Inc. v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 4, 2021

Except as otherwise provided in this Order 9 (see, e.g., second paragraph of section 5.2(a) below), or as otherwise stipulated or ordered, 10 Discovery Material that qualifies for protection under this Order must be clearly … If only a portion or 16 portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 17 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). 18

Knighton v. Cedarville Rancheria of Northern Paiute Indians

234 F. Supp. 3d 1042 · District Court, E.D. California · Feb 15, 2017

The Tribe’s governing body is the Community Council composed of all qualified voters of the Ranchería who are 18 years of age or older. Id. (Dkt. No. 1-2 at 46). … These admissions alone establish the Tribe’s regulatory authority over Knigh-ton’s employment.

Kopitar v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance

266 F.R.D. 493 · District Court, E.D. California · Mar 17, 2010

“Moreover, because the relevance of destroyed [evidence] cannot be clearly ascertained because the [evidence] no longer exist, a party can hardly assert any presumption of irrelevance as to the destroyed [evidence].” … This qualifies as willful spoliation under the circumstances. See Leon, 464 F.3d at 959 ; In re Napster, Inc., 462 F.Supp.2d at 1073-74 .

Marsh v. Bank of Sierra, Inc.

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 28, 2022

“prohibits discrimination ‘by any person who owns, leases (or leases to), or operates a place of 20 public accommodation,’ ” a defendant could be individually liable if that person “had the requisite 21 authority to qualify … The amended complaint should be clearly and boldly titled 10 “Second Amended Complaint,” refer to the appropriate case number, and be an original signed 11 under penalty of perjury.

(PC) Smith v. Shasta County Jail

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

The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an 27 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 28 490 U.S. at 327. … Jett, 439 F.3d at 1096. 24 A showing of merely negligent medical care is not enough to establish a constitutional 25 violation. Frost v.

North East Medical Services, Inc. v. CA Dept. of Health Care Services

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 19, 2019

BACKGROUND 12 Plaintiff is a federally-qualified health center (“FQHC”). 13 Compl. ¶ 1. … Sovereign Immunity 8 1.

(PC) Barker v. Osemwingie

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 19, 2020

Alternatively, they argue that they are 12 entitled to qualified immunity. (Id. at 8-11.) 13 B. … He 16 also argues that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity because the constitutional 17 standard for medical care has long been established. (Id. at 7-8.) 18 III.

(PC) Serna v. Sullivan

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 27, 2019

Discussion 20 Plaintiff has sufficiently established in the Complaint that he qualifies as disabled under 21 the ADA, because he is hearing-impaired and has medical … The amended complaint should be clearly and boldly 2 titled “First Amended Complaint,” refer to the appropriate case number, and be an original 3 signed under penalty of perjury.

Bernhard v. Muir

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 15, 2021

The Ninth Circuit 9 recognizes four theories that establish municipal liability under Monell: “(1) an official policy; (2) 10 a pervasive practice or custom; (3) a failure to train, supervise, or discipline; or (4) a … The defendants also argue 22 these officers are protected by qualified immunity for the same reason, but they do not dispute 23 that clearly established law at the relevant time prohibited warrantless searches and seizures

(PS) Beaton v. Amazon.Com, Inc.

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 8, 2020

However, a determination that a plaintiff qualifies financially for in 3 forma pauperis status does not complete the inquiry required by the statute. 4 “‘A district court may deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis … 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.

Estate of Oscar Guizar v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation, et al.

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 10, 2026

Except as otherwise provided in this Order, 7 or as otherwise stipulated or ordered, Disclosure or Discovery Material that qualifies for 8 protection under this Order must be clearly so designated before the … If only a portion or portions of the 15 material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the 16 protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). 17

(PC) Palacios v. Smith

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 4, 2020

Finally, Smith argues he is 28 entitled to qualified immunity. (Id. at 28.) 1 B. … Qualified Immunity 22 Because the court finds no violation of plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment rights, it need not 23 address Smith’s argument that he is entitled to qualified

Endurance Risk Solution Assurance Co. v. Travelers Property Casualty Co. of America

District Court, E.D. California · May 22, 2023

If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 20 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 21 portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). … This provision is not intended to modify whatever 7 procedure may be established in an e-discovery order that provides for production 8 without prior privilege review.

Gordon v. Vasquez

859 F. Supp. 413 · District Court, E.D. California · Jul 25, 1994

Accordingly, the court employs the “clearly erroneous or contrary to law” standard of review. … Congress thus established a right to preapplication legal assistance for capital defendants in federal habe'-as proceedings.” Id.

(PS) Love v. Tri-Counties Bank

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

Except as otherwise provided in this Order, 7 or as otherwise stipulated or ordered, Disclosure or Discovery Material that qualifies for 8 protection under this Order must be clearly designated before the material is … If only a portion or portions of the 16 material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 17 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate marking in the

Shunki E. Fleming v. C.S.P. Corcoran, et al.

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 10, 2026

Plaintiff’s complaint 24 does not clearly state what happened, when it happened, and who was involved. … nutritionally adequate food that is prepared and served 1 under conditions which do not present an immediate danger to the health and well-being of the 2 inmates who consume it,’ ” and “the state health code, while not establishing

Epperson v. Codification Order 497

District Court, E.D. California · Nov 8, 2024

complaint, or any portion thereof, is subject to 23 dismissal if it is frivolous or malicious, if it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be 24 granted, or if it seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Plaintiff’s 14 complaint also does not clearly identify the claims, causes of action, or the relief that Plaintiff is 15 seeking.

(PS) Gunn v. County of Butte

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

absolute prosecutorial 15 immunity. … Defendants Ramsey, Tufaro, Honea, and Thao are entitled to qualified immunity as to the federal claims alleged in the first amended complaint 17 because those claims do not establish