Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
6,306 results
2.18s
District Court, E.D. California · Nov 21, 2023
Defendant also asserts he is entitled 6 to qualified immunity from suit. … Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claim against defendant Lizarraga should be 12 dismissed, and the court need not address the qualified immunity argument. 13 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Mar 30, 2021
Tandem Computers, Inc., 818 F.2d 1433, 1436 (9th Cir. 1987). 19 In the endeavor to establish the existence of a factual dispute, the opposing party need not 20 establish a material issue of fact conclusively in its … immunity grounds. 14
Cited 0 timesUnknownCleveland v. United States Department of Agriculture
District Court, E.D. California · Apr 16, 2021
for credit; and (4) he was denied credit despite being qualified. … Plaintiff 3 fails to demonstrate that he is a member of a protected class, that he was qualified for credit, and that 4 he was denied credit despite being qualified.
Cited 0 timesUnknown(PS) Hawkins v. Kaiser Permanente
District Court, E.D. California · Feb 8, 2024
the 26 27 1 The fact that a private hospital or nursing home is subject to governmental regulation and receives government funds does not qualify … , or 4 immunity secured by the Constitution.
Cited 0 timesUnknown(PS) Ruth v. Walmart Stores Inc.
District Court, E.D. California · Aug 29, 2022
A plaintiff may establish Monell liability by showing that a city or county employee 22 committed an alleged constitutional violation pursuant to a formal governmental policy or a 23 “longstanding practice or custom which … identifying which defendant(s) are allegedly at fault for each claim, and 9 clearly identifying what legal cause of action is being asserted (for example: Claim I against 10 defendants X, Y, and Z for “Title VII Violation
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Mar 1, 2023
judge who took plaintiff’s guilty plea and sentenced him, and the San Joaquin County 13 District Attorney who prosecuted him. 14 Plaintiff generally alleges that “defendants have clearly … Hawaii, 939 F.2d 23 702, 708 (9th Cir. 1991)(requiring something more than conclusory assertions of a civil 24 conspiracy between a private party and a state actor in order to establish § 1983 liability). 25 Plaintiff
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Oct 4, 2024
The court may dismiss a claim as frivolous if it is based on an indisputably meritless 12 legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. … Watison, 668 F.3d at 1114-15. 8 Here, the complaint’s allegations do not establish a causal connection between any 9 adverse action by a named defendant and any protected conduct by plaintiff.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Nov 12, 2020
Even gross negligence is insufficient to establish deliberate 16 indifference to serious medical needs. SeeWood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1334 (9th Cir. 17 1990). … To establish a claim of deliberate indifference arising from a delay in providing care, a 21 plaintiff must show that the delay was harmful. SeeBerry v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Feb 11, 2020
Finally, 23 defendants argue that Alcaraz, Mejorado, and Sandy are entitled to qualified immunity. Id. at 24- 24 28. 25 B. … immunity.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDibbern v. City of Bakersfield
District Court, E.D. California · Apr 20, 2023
If only a portion 12 or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 13 … If only a portion or 22 portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 23
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Aug 31, 2022
By establishing the existence of a serious medical need, a prisoner satisfies the 15 objective requirement for proving an Eighth Amendment violation. Farmer v. … Plaintiff is advised that in an amended complaint he must clearly identify each 3 defendant and the action that defendant took that violated plaintiff’s constitutional rights.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jan 10, 2023
This allegation does not establish the kind of “wantonness” required to state an Eighth 3 Amendment claim. … Because the complaint as written does not clearly tell the court what 15 was done to you, by whom and when, the court cannot tell if you are able to make any legal 16 claims.
Cited 0 timesUnknownEstate of Max Benson, et al. v. Guiding Hands School, Inc., et al.
District Court, E.D. California · Apr 27, 2026
find do not establish a mandatory duty. … specific event that should 26 have informed the LEA defendants about the dangers of restraints. 27 28 2 The Court also declines to address the immunity
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Dec 17, 2019
Analysis of Defendants’ Motion 16 Defendants argue that: (1) the Court should not imply a Bivens remedy in this novel context; 17 (2) plaintiff’s claims are barred by qualified immunity … Qualified Immunity 7 Because the Court has found that the conduct alleged by Plaintiff does not state a constitution: 8 || deprivation, the Court need not address Defendants’ arguments for qualified immunity. 9
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Apr 16, 2026
for protection under this Order must be clearly so designated before and/or at the time 23 the material is disclosed or produced. … This 13 provision is not intended to modify whatever procedure may be established in an e-discovery 14 order that provides for production without prior privilege review.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Aug 24, 2022
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 … Pursuant to the RA, “[n]o otherwise qualified individual with a 24 disability in the United States . . . shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Sep 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 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Feb 2, 2026
In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the court will 28 (1) accept as true all of the factual allegations contained in the complaint, unless they are clearly 1 baseless or fanciful, (2) construe those allegations … These allegations are insufficient to state a claim as a matter of law. 12 First, plaintiff fails to establish that defendants, Iman’s sisters and brother-in-law, owed Iman a 13 legal duty of care.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Apr 12, 2022
The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an 4 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 5 490 U.S. at 327. … “The party 20 invoking federal jurisdiction bears the burden of establishing ‘standing.’” Susan B.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jan 9, 2024
If only a portion or portions of the 4 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 6 … If 16 only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the 17 Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making 18 appropriate markings in the margins
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna