Case law

Vang v. Geil Enterprises Inc.

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

Instead, 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a) is the only 23 provision that establishes a private right of action under ERISA. … Oregon 8 Lithoprint, Inc., 102 F.3d 376, 378 (9th Cir.1 996) (holding that money damages do not qualify as 9 ‘equitable relief’ within the meaning of Section 1132(a)(3)).

(PS) Liang v. Anderson

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 29, 2021

However, a determination that a plaintiff qualifies 8 financially for in forma pauperis status does not complete the inquiry required by the statute. 9 “‘A district court may deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis … Under this standard, a court must dismiss a 5 complaint as frivolous where it is based on an indisputably meritless legal theory or where the 6 factual contentions are clearly baseless.

Hall v. City of Weed

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 8, 2021

(ECF 5 No. 1 at 18); Sheehan, 743 F.3d at 1232. 6 City argues Plaintiffs fail to state a claim under the ADA because they fail to establish the 7 first and fourth elements — a qualifying … (See generally ECF No. 1.) 25 Because Plaintiffs do not identify any qualifying disability, they fail to establish the first 26 element of their ADA claim.

(PS) Lugo v. Durham

District Court, E.D. California · Oct 20, 2022

However, a determination that a plaintiff qualifies financially for in forma 4 pauperis status does not complete the inquiry required by the statute. … 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.

Ramsden

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

In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the court will 5 (1) accept as true all of the factual allegations contained in the complaint, unless they are clearly 6 baseless or fanciful, (2) construe those allegations … Even if plaintiff’s public function theory were sufficient to establish action under color of 28 law, the claim would be barred by such immunity. 1 Accordingly, this theory cannot establish action

Southern Pacific Transportation Co. v. United States

462 F. Supp. 1193 · District Court, E.D. California · Nov 28, 1978

The McCord court declared: if Congress had intended to impose strict liability on an owner-bailor, it was capable of clearly and directly so providing. … The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the state penalty *1219 could not be imposed because the provisions of the Act of June 18, 1910, “so clearly establish the purpose of Congress to subject such companies to a uniform

(PC) J'Weial v. CDCR

District Court, E.D. California · Feb 15, 2024

Mere negligence 28 1 establish liability, but rather, the official’s conduct must have been wanton. … This case is REMANDED to the Magistrate 19 Judge for further proceedings consistent with this order, 20 including consideration of the qualified immunity issue raised by 21 defendant’s motion

(PC) Harris v. California Correctional Center

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 12, 2021

Regardless, any claims against the prison itself are 25 barred by sovereign immunity. “[A]n unconsenting State is immune from suits brought in federal 26 courts by her own citizens.” Edelman v. … Dept. of State Police, 491 U.S. 58 (1989)] establishes that the State and arms of 28 the State, which have traditionally enjoyed Eleventh Amendment immunity, are not subject to suit 1 under § 1983 in either federal court

CHARLESETTA MOORE, SR. v. C.F.Y. DEVELOPMENT INC., et al.

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 12, 2025

leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this action (see ECF No. 3), plaintiff’s further motions to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF Nos. 5, 12) 28 submitted with amended complaints are unnecessary. 1 immune … It now clearly appears that granting further leave to amend would be 20 futile. See Klamath-Lake Pharm. Ass’n v. Klamath Med. Serv.

(PC) Davis v. Wheeler

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 4, 2019

“To establish a violation of Title II of the ADA, a plaintiff must 12 show that (1) [he] is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) [he] was excluded from 13 participation in or otherwise discriminated against with … Because Plaintiff has not plead facts that establish he is a qualified individual 16 with a disability under the ADA, this claim in its current state cannot pass the screening stage. 17 Plaintiff will be provided an

Ihsan Abdelhalim v. City of Manteca, et al.

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 20, 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 4 establish municipal liability [under Monell], a plaintiff must show that a ‘policy or custom’ 5 led to the plaintiff’s injury.” Castro v.

Hubbard

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 25, 2026

complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner raised claims that are legally 9 “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek 10 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … “[M]andatory exhaustion statutes like the PLRA establish mandatory exhaustion regimes, 5 foreclosing judicial discretion.”

Espinoza v. Guardian Industries, LLC

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 23, 2024

If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 12 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 13 portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). … If only a portion or portions of the 23 material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 24 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the

United States v. Helmy

712 F. Supp. 1423 · District Court, E.D. California · May 31, 1989

A defendant tried for treason would not have the right to challenge the President’s determination that a particular country qualified for enemy nation status. … Accordingly, a defendant does not have a right to challenge the executive’s determination that a particular commodity qualifies for export controls.

Rodgers v. County of Yolo—Sheriff's Department

889 F. Supp. 1284 · District Court, E.D. California · May 31, 1995

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. … Walters’ deposition does not clearly establish the dates that certain incidents occurred after defendant O’Neal ceased to be her Animal Control Supervisor. (Defs.’ Ex.

(PC) Gatlin v. Bank of America

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 15, 2023

The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous when it is based on an 11 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 12 490 U.S. at 327. … Municipal liability under 24 Monell may be established in any of three ways: (1) “the plaintiff may prove that a city employee 25 committed the alleged constitutional violation pursuant to a formal governmental policy

Kourosh Hamidi v. Service Employees International Union Local 1000

231 F. Supp. 3d 624 · District Court, E.D. California · Feb 8, 2017

Instead, “the intervening case must [be] ... clearly irreconcilable.” Id. (emphasis in original). Knox is not “clearly irreconcilable” with Mitchell. … It is well-established that unions may require nonmembers to pay the portion of fair share fees that are used to fund "germane” expenditures. See Ry. Emp. Dep't v.

(PC) Shropshire v. D'Agostini

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 12, 2021

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. … To establish a claim of deliberate indifference arising from a delay in providing care, 12 a plaintiff must show that the delay was harmful. See Berry v.

(PC) Wilson v. Torres

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 20, 2021

possessed 14 with final authority to establish that policy.” … immune from suit. 18 E.

Dorroh v. Deerbrook Insurance Co.

223 F. Supp. 3d 1081 · District Court, E.D. California · Dec 9, 2016

It is also clearly established that a liability insurer issuing a check that is jointly payable to claimants and known lienholders has not proceeded in bad faith. See Fitzgerald v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., No. … According to plaintiffs, “such a policy clearly violated well established laws.” (Id.)