Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
6,306 results
1.56s
Friends of Yosemite Valley v. Scarlett
439 F. Supp. 2d 1074 · District Court, E.D. California · Jul 19, 2006
As set forth above, one of the things that qualifies under Section 551(13) as an agency action is a “rule.” … Defendants qualify this contention somewhat, stating that they do not seek to strike the portions of the declarations of Bart Brown and Greg Adair to the extent that they are offered solely for the purpose of establishing
Cited 9 timesPublished(PC) Miller v. Mule Creek State Prison
District Court, E.D. California · Feb 8, 2022
: 2 Every person who, under color of [state law] . . . subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States . . . to the deprivation 3 of any rights, privileges, or immunities … 2005) (footnote and citations omitted). 3 • If plaintiff is attempting to state a claim that a public program or service violated 4 the ADA, he must show: (1) he is a “qualified
Cited 0 timesUnknown599 F. Supp. 2d 1197 · District Court, E.D. California · Jan 30, 2009
In light of clearly established precedent, this Court is unable to say that the State’s interest here is similarly diminished or that the Plaintiffs’ potential burden is even remotely comparable. … As discussed above, the merits of each constitutional claim are not only not “clearly established,” but almost certainly must fail. Thus, there is no risk of irreparable injury to Plaintiffs’ contributors.
Cited 8 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jun 26, 2024
complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are 25 “frivolous, malicious, or fail[] to state a claim upon which relief may be granted,” or that “seek[] 26 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … “[A] judge may dismiss . . . claims which are ‘based on indisputably meritless legal 2 theories’ or whose ‘factual contentions are clearly baseless.’” Jackson v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Dec 6, 2021
In addition, she contends that she is 28 entitled to qualified immunity. Id. … Finally, she argues 24 she is entitled to qualified immunity. Id.
Cited 0 timesUnknownWilliams v. The People of the State of California
District Court, E.D. California · Jun 28, 2022
Cole, 4 Cal.App.4th 3 1327, 1335 (1992); Awabdy, 368 F.3d at 1068 (“An individual seeking to bring a malicious 4 prosecution claim must generally establish that the prior proceedings terminated in such a manner 5 as … and there are allegations that the prior 9 proceedings were instituted as the result of fraudulent conduct, a malicious prosecution plaintiff is 10 not precluded from maintaining his action unless the defendants can establish
Cited 0 timesUnknownVillalta v. Superior Court of California County of Orange
District Court, E.D. California · Sep 29, 2020
The Eleventh Amendment bars such suits unless the State has 13 waived its immunity or unless Congress has exercised its undoubted power under § 5 of the 14 Fourteenth Amendment to override that immunity.” Will v. … Abbey, 263 F.3d 1070, 1074-75 (9th Cir. 2001) (en banc) 2 (“[T]here is a clearly established constitutional due process right not to be subjected to criminal 3 charges on the basis of false evidence that was deliberately
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Aug 7, 2023
Id. at 251–52. 18 In attempting to establish a factual dispute, the opposing party need not establish a 19 material issue of fact conclusively in its favor. … As to Monell liability, Perez argues “cities may not assert the same defense of 22 qualified immunity that may be available to individual officers” and “cities can only be held 23 liable when an officer’s violation .
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Nov 21, 2022
Womancare, 878 F.2d 1145 (9th Cir. 1989) 1 (finding a citizen’s arrest group did not qualify as “acting under color of state law” for purposes 2 of § 1983)(citing Lugar v. Edmondson Oil Co. … Thus, 14 acts of persons in the ambit of their personal pursuits are clearly not acting under color of law 15 (T.G. supra).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Feb 25, 2026
“The requisite causal 1 connection may be established when an official sets in motion a ‘series of acts by others which 2 the actor knows or reasonably should know would cause others to inflict’ constitutional harms.” … The one significant qualifier is that “the remedies must indeed 22 be ‘available’ to the prisoner.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jun 6, 2024
If only a portion of the material on a page qualifies for 25 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making 26 appropriate markings in the margins). … If only a portion of the material on a page qualifies for protection, 7 the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate 8 markings in the margins).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Apr 26, 2023
However, a determination that a plaintiff qualifies financially for in forma 1 pauperis status does not complete the inquiry required by the statute. … Under this standard, a court must dismiss a 18 complaint as frivolous where it is based on an indisputably meritless legal theory or where the 19 factual contentions are clearly baseless.
Cited 0 timesUnknown(PS) Nomesiri v. US Department of Education
District Court, E.D. California · Jul 23, 2020
case at any time if 23 it determines that the allegation of poverty is untrue, or if the action is frivolous or malicious, fails 24 to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against an immune … After the Department 28 informed him that he “do[es] not qualify for discharge” and that he “may file a lawsuit in U.S. 1 Federal District Court if he disagrees,” plaintiff filed this suit. (Id.)
Cited 0 timesUnknown328 F. Supp. 2d 1086 · District Court, E.D. California · Jun 25, 2004
Prison officials do not argue that the named plaintiffs are somehow immune from having to work on Fridays in the future. … Pre-RLUIPA monetary damages, for instance, would clearly be precluded.
Cited 8 timesPublished206 F. Supp. 2d 1068 · District Court, E.D. California · Jun 14, 2002
While, clearly, Alford pleas do not offend the Constitution, and indeed frequently benefit the parolee, that is not the issue in terms of the three part balancing test. … Finally, for what it is worth, California’s situation far more clearly resembles that found in Morrissey rather than the situation in the District of Columbia.
Cited 16 timesPublishedWiley v. Kern High School District
District Court, E.D. California · Oct 12, 2022
With respect to the federal 11 claims, KHSD argues that Eleventh Amendment immunity and qualified immunity apply. See 12 Doc. No. 9. … Countrywide Home Loans, 533 F.3d 1031, 4 1034 (9th Cir. 2008). 28 U.S.C. § 1446 establishes the procedures to be followed by a defendant 5 in removing a case from state court to federal court. Progressive W. Ins.
Cited 0 timesUnknownSydney Stewart v. Sacramento Sheriff Office, et al.
District Court, E.D. California · Nov 20, 2025
Plaintiff does not clearly allege a separate cause of action 21 and what procedural protection Plaintiff believes they were entitled to but denied. … “In order to establish municipal liability [under 28 Monell], a plaintiff must show that a ‘policy or custom’ led to the plaintiff’s injury.” Castro 1 v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownLopez v. AT&T Mobility Services, LLC
District Court, E.D. California · Feb 6, 2023
If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 24 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 25 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making … This 19 provision is not intended to modify whatever procedure may be established in an e-discovery 20 order that provides for production without prior privilege review.
Cited 0 timesUnknownBronco Wine Co. v. United States Department of Treasury
997 F. Supp. 1309 · District Court, E.D. California · Dec 24, 1996
. § 201 , et seq., establishes the regulatory scheme which governs the bottling, packaging, and labeling of wine. … used unless the wine either (1) meets the appellation of origin requirements for the geographic area named; (2) is “grandfathered” in that the brand name is one for which a COLA was issued prior to July 7, 1986, and is qualified
Cited 18 timesPublished(PS) Paezboyd v. Kaiser Foundation Hospital
District Court, E.D. California · Jun 25, 2025
“frivolous or malicious,” “fails to state a 27 claim on which relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is 28 1 immune … An equal protection claim is established when a plaintiff shows he was treated 15 differently than other similarly situated people on the basis of a suspect classification. City of 16 Cleburne, 473 U.S. at 439-40.
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna