Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filterscaed

6,306 results

4.01s

  • Phillips v. Dollar Tree Distribution, Inc.

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

    If only a portion 12 or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 13 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 for 22 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making 23 appropriate markings in the margins).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • (PS) Olson v. Slote

    District Court, E.D. California · Mar 27, 2025

    In other words, plaintiffs in negligence suits must establish a duty of care, 14 breach of that duty, and the breach’s proximate causation of a resulting injury. … Even if Plaintiff could establish that the Defendants were paid employees, the 28 claim is not cognizable for the reasons stated above. 1 4.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • (PS) Warfield v. United States Air Force

    District Court, E.D. California · Jun 17, 2020

    Accordingly, Title 18 of the United States Code does not establish any 19 private right of action and cannot support a civil lawsuit. See Aldabe v. … To establish a prima facie case of 18 disparate treatment discrimination under Title VII, a plaintiff must show that he (1) is a member 19 of a protected class; (2) was qualified for and was performing his job satisfactorily

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Weil v. Raisin City Elementary School District

    District Court, E.D. California · Nov 19, 2024

    the part admitted and qualify or deny the rest. … part admitted and qualify or deny the rest.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • (PC) Merino v. St. Joaquing Gn Hospital

    District Court, E.D. California · Dec 21, 2022

    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. … Plaintiff is now unable to 13 walk but is unwilling to undergo further surgeries as his immune system cannot “resist another 14 surgery.”

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • (PC) Johnson v. Kelley

    District Court, E.D. California · Mar 13, 2020

    immunity. 12 I. … immunity. 11

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Jenkins v. City of Vallejo

    District Court, E.D. California · Aug 19, 2021

    If only a portion or portions 20 of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the 21 protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). … If only a 2 portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must 3 clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). 4

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • MaComber

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

    (9th Cir. 2020). 5 The legal principles applicable to requests for injunctive relief, such as a temporary 6 restraining order or preliminary injunction, are well established … s complaint, or any portion thereof, is subject to dismissal if it is frivolous or malicious, 1 if it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or if it seeks monetary relief from a 2 defendant who is immune

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Luna v. Pulsipher

    District Court, E.D. California · Nov 6, 2023

    If only a portion or portions 5 of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the 6 protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). 7 … If only a portion or portions of the material 15 on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 16 portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • (PC) Davis v. Uddin

    District Court, E.D. California · Feb 18, 2025

    Finally, defendant submits that he is entitled to 25 qualified immunity because his medical examination did not violate the Eighth Amendment and 26 … The court understands any such statement by defendant as 28 evidence of his intent, and not as factual support for a separate claim for relief. 1 because it was not clearly established that his conduct violated the

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • (PS) Warfield v. United States Air Force

    District Court, E.D. California · Jul 9, 2020

    Accordingly, Title 18 of the United States Code does not establish any 26 private right of action and cannot support a civil lawsuit. See Aldabe v. … To 9 establish a prima facie case of disparate treatment discrimination under Title VII, a plaintiff must 10 show that he (1) is a member of a protected class; (2) was qualified for and was performing his 11 job satisfactorily

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Schwab v. City of Fairfield

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

    If only a portion or 4 portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 5 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 for 14 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making 15 appropriate markings in the margins).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • (PC) McElroy v. Gomez

    District Court, E.D. California · Nov 9, 2020

    The Eighth Amendment 6 right to food was clearly established as of at least 2001. Foster v. Runnels, 554 F.3d 807, 815 (9th Cir. 7 2009). … See Foster, 554 14 F.3d at 813-14 (guard not entitled to qualified immunity because she did not establish that prisoner's 15 refusal to uncover back window of his cell caused safety issues for food service through food

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Murphy Esq. Sr. v. U.S. Internal Revenue Service

    District Court, E.D. California · Jul 9, 2021

    Sovereign Immunity 2 The United States is immune from suit absent specific statutory consent waiving 3 immunity. Affiliated Ute Citizens of Utah v. … To the 21 extent Plaintiff elects to amend his complaint, he should allege facts establishing the existence of 22 a contract with the United States and describe how that contract was breached as well as the 23 amount

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • (PS) Wilkinson v. PHH Mortgage Corp.

    District Court, E.D. California · May 29, 2024

    IFP statute requires federal courts to dismiss a case if the action is legally 25 “frivolous or malicious,” fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted or seeks 26 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Because the complaint as 26 written does not clearly state any legal claims or supporting facts, it will not be served on 27 defendants.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • West v. Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service

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

    complaint, or any portion thereof, is subject to dismissal if it is frivolous 26 or malicious, if it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or if it seeks monetary 27 relief from a defendant who is immune … Under § 6248(a), eligible individuals may receive a tax 8 credit in the amount of $1,200 ($2,400 if filing a joint return), plus $500 multiplied by the number 9 of qualifying children.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • (PC) Fields v. Allison

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

    [Inmates] with a COVID-19 Risk Score of 4 or higher will undergo additional custodial screening to determine which 13 individuals will qualify for expedited release. … BRENNAN 4 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Q_—_ x Soda “Tn light of the foregoing the court does not reach defendants’ qualified immunity

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Ferguson v. KIA Motors America, Inc.

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

    If only a portion 9 or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 10 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). 11 … If only a portion or 19 portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 20 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). 21

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Martinez v. Manville

    District Court, E.D. California · Oct 24, 2023

    If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for 15 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., 16 by making appropriate markings in the margins). … If only a portion 26 or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 27 must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in 1 (b

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • (PC) Archer v. Mnuchin

    District Court, E.D. California · Mar 5, 2024

    The complaint does not present 21 plausible factual allegations establishing any claim or legally coherent theories of liability. The 22 complaint should be dismissed on this basis. See Denton v. … Based on the complaint’s 28 incomprehensible allegations, it clearly appears leave to amend would be futile. 1 V.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.