Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
6,306 results
1.71s
District Court, E.D. California · Mar 29, 2024
The court may dismiss a claim as frivolous if it is based on an indisputably meritless 9 legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. … deprivations occurred because of circumstances that did not 22 constitute an established procedure.
Cited 0 timesUnknownWelch v. County of Tulare, California
District Court, E.D. California · Aug 3, 2023
If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for 2 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) 3 by making appropriate markings in the margins. … If only a 13 portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing 14 Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making 15 appropriate markings in the margins
Cited 0 timesUnknown(PC) Rood v. Department of Corrections
District Court, E.D. California · Dec 21, 2021
Claims are frivolous where they are based on an indisputably meritless legal theory or 26 where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327. … Examples of immunity that would preclude relief during screening, include, but are not 3 limited to, quasi-judicial immunity, sovereign immunity, or qualified immunity.
Cited 0 timesUnknown(PS) Van den Heuvel v. Costello
District Court, E.D. California · Apr 21, 2023
Under the IFP statute, the court must screen the complaint and dismiss any 22 claims that are “frivolous or malicious,” fail to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or 23 seek monetary relief against an immune … If 1 plaintiff wishes to bring a negligence claim alongside any federal claim, plaintiff must clearly 2 include coherent facts for each of the negligence elements provided under the Statement of Claim 3 section (see
Cited 0 timesUnknownNegrete v. Amazon.com Services LLC
District Court, E.D. California · Jul 26, 2023
If only a portion 28 or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 1 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). 2 … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for 10 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making 11 appropriate markings in the margins).
Cited 0 timesUnknown(PC) Booth v. Williams College
District Court, E.D. California · Jun 18, 2020
The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an 26 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 27 490 U.S. at 327. … However, several “safe 14 harbor regulations” have been carved out of ERISA that describe the circumstances under which 15 a group insurance plan offered by an insurer to employees will not qualify as an employee 16
Cited 0 timesUnknown700 F. Supp. 2d 1225 · District Court, E.D. California · Mar 24, 2010
as a matter of law that Defendants are entitled to immunity from antitrust liability alleged in the FAC. … Clearly, a $200,000 award is substantial, especially given the uncertain nature of the evidence of future damages presented at trial.
Cited 20 timesPublished595 F. Supp. 2d 1111 · District Court, E.D. California · Jan 21, 2009
The state appellate court’s decision must be measured against these clearly established principles of federal law. … It cannot be said that the Court of Appeal’s decision was an “objectively unreasonable” application of clearly established federal law. See Williams (Terry) v.
Cited 3 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. California · Oct 12, 2021
If plaintiff wishes to bring a threat to safety claim in an amended complaint, it 2 needs to clearly state how the alleged facts relate to that claim. 3 i. … Legal Standards for ADA Claims 25 Title II of the ADA prohibits a public entity from discriminating against a qualified 26 individual with a disability on the basis of disability. 42 U.S.C
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Mar 13, 2024
Plaintiff contends that he 11 refused to speak about the case and instructed Stoller to raise the issues previously discussed to 12 qualify for resentencing. See id. at 5. … Plaintiff claims that if Radekin had clearly conveyed 6 that she would not represent Plaintiff, Plaintiff would have been appointed another lawyer to 7 represent him. See id.
Cited 0 timesUnknownVasquez v. O'Reilly Auto Enterprises, LLC
District Court, E.D. California · Oct 6, 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 22 for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by 23 making appropriate markings in margins).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Mar 11, 2025
2 Defendant argues that plaintiff’s alleged injuries are insufficient to give rise to an Eighth 27 Amendment claim and that he is entitled to qualified … immunity.
Cited 0 timesUnknownMcAfee v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
625 F. Supp. 2d 956 · District Court, E.D. California · Dec 12, 2008
Plaintiffs prosecution of this action has clarified whether performance-based stock options qualify as “predisability earnings” under the plan. … “[T]he established standard when determining a reasonable hourly rate is the ‘rate prevailing in the community for similar work performed by attorneys of comparable skill, experience, and reputation.’ ” Camacho v.
Cited 3 timesPublishedMiguel Marquez Valdivia v. County of Sacramento, et al.
District Court, E.D. California · May 21, 2026
immunity. … CONCLUSION 9 A plaintiff bears the burden of proof in establishing tolling.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jan 11, 2022
If only a portion 23 or portions of the 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 margins). … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies 6 for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by 7 making appropriate markings in the margins).
Cited 0 timesUnknown(PS) Rubang v. Ally Financial Inc.
District Court, E.D. California · Apr 10, 2020
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.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Mar 6, 2020
Even if a law enforcement officer 10 uses excessive force in violation of a citizen’s Fourth Amendment rights, the officer will still be 11 entitled to qualified immunity unless clearly established law provides that the … establish 18 defamation under state law.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Aug 4, 2021
by a... policymaker possessed 19 with final authority to establish that policy.” … This judicial immunity insulates 13 judges from suits brought under section 1983. Olsen, 363 F.3d at 923.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Nov 28, 2023
In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the 11 court will (1) accept as true all of the factual allegations contained in the complaint, unless they 12 are clearly baseless or fanciful, (2) construe those allegations … Accordingly, Title 18 of the United States Code does not establish any private right 10 of action and cannot support a civil lawsuit. See Aldabe v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownWallick v. Campbell Soup Supply Company, L.L.C.
District Court, E.D. California · May 23, 2022
Except as otherwise provided in this Protective 24 Order, or as otherwise stipulated or ordered, disclosure of material that qualifies for protection under this 25 Protective Order must be clearly so designated before … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies 6 for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s). 7 (b) for testimony given in deposition or in other
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna