Case law

Amini v. Nationwide Ins. Co.

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 12, 2024

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

(PS) Dewey v. Regents of University of California

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

Accordingly, the request is denied. 1 which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against an immune defendant. … Nor has plaintiff established diversity jurisdiction over her state law claims. 7 See 28 U.S.C. § 1332; Bautista v.

(PC) Ray v. Hosey

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 11, 2022

Edwards violated Plaintiff’s state 25 and/or federal rights because he failed to extend the laws to Plaintiff, which is contrary to and an 26 unreasonable application of clearly established federal laws. … Plaintiff attempted to explain that the CDCR’s and Welch’s conduct is also 9 contrary to and an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law.

Grason Electric Co. v. Sacramento Municipal Utility District

571 F. Supp. 1504 · District Court, E.D. California · Sep 23, 1983

Thus the sort of catalog sought by the plaintiffs is clearly out of the question. … If, on the other hand, SMUD is not immune under the “state action exemption” (see n. 3, supra), then its otherwise conceded monopoly evaporates — in this lawsuit, if not in real life. 20 .

(PC) Spencer v. Pulido-Esparza

District Court, E.D. California · May 10, 2023

Amendment immunity also extends to state officials sued in their official 28 capacities. … To 19 the contrary, as discussed above in the section titled Eleventh Amendment Immunity, CDCR as 20 a state agency is entitled to immunity under the Eleventh Amendment, as are Defendants 21 Sherman and Smith as state

(PC) Bell v. Jones

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

It is well established that a layperson cannot ordinarily represent the 17 interests of a class. See McShane v. United States, 366 F.2d 286 (9th Cir. 1966). … Judicial Immunity 14 The Supreme Court has held that judges acting within the course and scope of their 15 judicial duties are absolutely immune from liability for damages

(PC) Lucero v. State of California

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

“The State of California has not waived its Eleventh Amendment immunity with 21 respect to claims brought under § 1983 in federal court....” Dittman v. … Next, 10 the prisoner bears the burden of establishing that a prison policy constitutes a substantial burden 11 on that exercise of religion.

S.L. v. County of Trinity

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 20, 2024

If only a portion 25 or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 26 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies 8 for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by 9 making appropriate markings in the margins).

(PS) Vigil v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.

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

Legal Standard 23 A determination that a plaintiff qualifies financially for in forma pauperis status does not 24 complete the inquiry required by the statute. … IFP statute requires federal courts to 25 dismiss a case if the action is legally “frivolous or malicious,” fails to state a claim upon which 26 relief may be granted or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune

(PC) Dunbar v. California Corrections Department

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 20, 2019

The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an 19 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 20 490 U.S. at 327. … It is well- 23 established that “inmates lack a separate constitutional entitlement to a specific prison grievance 24 procedure.” Ramirez v. Galaza, 334 F.3d 850, 860 (9th Cir. 2003) (citing Mann v.

(PC) Newsome v. Inniss-Burton

District Court, E.D. California · Feb 16, 2022

immunity. … Given the absence of a triable issue on Plaintiffs deliberate indifference claim, '6 Defendant’s assertion of qualified immunity does not bear evaluation here.

(PS) Ortega v. Hinjosa

District Court, E.D. California · Oct 31, 2022

Moreover, a 4 determination that a plaintiff qualifies financially for in forma pauperis status does not complete 5 the inquiry required by the statute. … time if the allegation of poverty is 17 found to be untrue or if it is determined that the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a 18 claim on which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against an immune

(PC) Eleson v. Lizarraga

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 3, 2019

California, 384 22 F.3d 1184, 1188 (9th Cir. 2004) (“It is well established that state judges are entitled to absolute 23 immunity for their judicial acts.”) (citing Pierson v. … This immunity is an immunity from suit, not just from an assessment of damages. 27 1 Plaintiff’s allegations that defendants Lizarraga and Diaz

(PS) Alston v. LLoyd

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

Tandem Computers, Inc., 818 F.2d 1433, 1436 (9th Cir. 1987). 18 In the endeavor to establish the existence of a factual dispute, the nonmoving party need 19 not establish a material issue of fact conclusively. … Defendant argues that there is no 13 genuine issue of material fact as to whether Deputy Lloyd used excessive force, and that he is 14 entitled to qualified immunity in any event.

(PC) Deegan v. State of California

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 30, 2021

Immune Defendants: 2 i. … Mich. 24 Dep’t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 67, 71 (1989) (“We cannot conclude that § 1983 was intended 25 to disregard the well-established immunity of a State from being sued without its consent.”).

(PC) Gelazela v. United States of America

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 22, 2022

The basis of a Bivens action is some illegal or inappropriate conduct on the part of a 26 federal official or agent that violates a clearly established constitutional right. … Chandler, 303 F.3d 1039, 1052 (9th Cir. 2002). 16 “To establish a violation of Title II of the ADA, a plaintiff must show that (1) [he] is a 17 qualified individual with a disability; (2) [he] was excluded from participation

(PS) Akbar v. Ashanti Publishing Group

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 9, 2023

However, a determination that a plaintiff qualifies financially for in forma 6 pauperis status does not complete the inquiry required by the statute. … time if the allegation of 18 poverty is found to be untrue or if it is determined that the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to 19 state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against an immune

CDCR

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

Second, he is 9 qualified for and participates in MCSP’s educational programs. … Discussion 22 Plaintiff has not established exceptional circumstances warranting the appointment of 23 counsel under § 1915(e).

Richard L. Daugherty, Sr. v. Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office, et al.

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 9, 2026

In 2 reviewing a complaint under this standard, the court accepts as true the factual 3 allegations contained in the complaint, unless they are clearly baseless or fanciful, and 4 construes those allegations in the … “In order to establish 5 municipal liability [under Monell], a plaintiff must show that a ‘policy or custom’ led to the 6 plaintiff’s injury.” Castro v.

Galindo

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

If 2 only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 3 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins) and must … If only a portion or portions of the 13 material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) 14 (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins) and