Case law

Sacks v. Richardson Greenshield Securities, Inc.

781 F. Supp. 1475 · District Court, E.D. California · Dec 26, 1991

No prescience to predict the law established by Gilmer and its progeny can fairly be required of plaintiffs counsel. … [Citations omitted] The error must have been obvious and capable of being readily and instantly perceived by the average person qualified to serve as an arbitrator.

(PC) Jones v. Shute

District 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.

(HC) Bohannan v. Muniz

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

Only Supreme Court precedent may constitute “clearly established 15 Federal law,” but courts may look to circuit law “to ascertain whether…the particular point in 16 issue is clearly established by Supreme Court precedent … The question at this stage is whether the state court 27 reasonably applied clearly established federal law to the facts before it. Id. at 181-182.

(PC) Hatton v. Mills

District 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.

ARC Students for Liberty Campaign v. Los Rios Community College District

732 F. Supp. 2d 1051 · District Court, E.D. California · Aug 11, 2010

This discretionary authority, however, is clearly limited by the regulations the board has promulgated and the laws of California. … Rather, the powers must be “general enough and have sufficient impact throughout the district” to qualify as a government function. Id. at 53 , 90 S.Ct. 791 .

Hernandez v. County of Fresno

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

Except as otherwise provided in this Order or 4 as otherwise stipulated or ordered, discovery material and information that qualify for protection 5 under this Order must be clearly so designated before the material is … This provision 23 is not intended to modify whatever procedure may be established in an e-discovery order that 24 provides for production without prior privilege review.

Lynn v. County of Solano

District 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

(PC) Allen v. Sacramento County

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 3, 2023

The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an 7 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 8 490 U.S. at 327. … The court cannot refer to a prior complaint to 2 understand the plaintiff’s claims. 3 In an amended complaint, plaintiff must clearly identify each defendant and the action that

Smith v. George Brown Fitness

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 23, 2025

Stahl, 254 F.3d 845 (9th Cir. 2001) (dismissal required of in forma 1 pauperis proceedings which seek monetary relief from immune defendants); Cato v. … While the complaint is short, 20 it does not clearly state what happened. Plaintiff, who does not allege she was employed by any 21 defendant, alleges she was racially profiled.

Jennifer Nicole Butler v. Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department, et al.

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 19, 2026

In 8 reviewing a complaint under this standard, the court accepts as true the factual 9 allegations contained in the complaint, unless they are clearly baseless or fanciful, and 10 construes those allegations in the … An individual defendant is not liable on a civil rights claim unless the facts 23 establish the defendant’s personal involvement in the constitutional deprivation or a 24 causal connection between the defendant's wrongful

DeVaughn v. Fresno Police Dept.

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 10, 2024

“The requisite causal connection may be established when an official 20 sets in motion a ‘series of acts by others which the actor knows or reasonably should know would 21 cause others to inflict’ constitutional harms … The amended complaint should be clearly and boldly titled “First 3 Amended Complaint,” refer to the appropriate case number, and be an original signed under penalty 4 of perjury.

Chestnut

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 26, 2026

For the reasons stated in those cases, 17 Petitioner has established that he has a likelihood of success on the merits. … Petitioner has thus established irreparable harm. 13 The balance of the equities and public interest are merged as the Government 14 is the non-moving party, and these factors clearly weigh in Petitioner’s favor

Lodestar Co. v. County of Mono

639 F. Supp. 1439 · District Court, E.D. California · Jul 24, 1986

Section 1983 provides in relevant part that: Every person who ... subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen ... to the deprivation of any rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution ... shall be liable … Consideration of the state’s law concerning the liability of corporations for their predecessor’s torts clearly suggests that the Town is not liable for the County’s torts.

Huggins v. Amazon.com Services, LLC

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 22, 2022

If only a 2 portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 3 must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the 4 margins). … This 10 provision is not intended to modify whatever procedure may be established in an e-discovery 11

(PC) Green v. Lacebal

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 27, 2022

The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an 6 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 7 490 U.S. at 327. … It is well-established that 7 inmates have a right to file grievances against correctional officers. See Watison v. Carter, 668 8 F.3d 1108, 1114 (9th Cir. 2012) (citing Brodheim v.

(PC) Iseli v. Unknown

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 9, 2025

“[A] judge may dismiss . . . claims which are ‘based on indisputably meritless legal 10 theories’ or whose ‘factual contentions are clearly baseless.’” Jackson v. … Id. 25 It is well-established that prisoners have no constitutional right to a particular 26 classification. Hernandez v.

(PC) Singanonh v. Rodriguez

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 3, 2021

Defendants also argue 5 that all defendants are entitled to summary judgment on the excessive force claim because the 6 force used was objectively reasonable and because they are entitled to qualified immunity. 7 … Plaintiff 25 also does not address Defendants’ argument that they are entitled to qualified immunity. 26 Plaintiff’s opposition is signed under penalty of perjury.

(PC) Davis v. Kings County Board of Supervisors

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 31, 2020

Claims Regarding Disability Discrimination 13 To state a claim for violation of Title II of the ADA or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation 14 Act, a plaintiff must show that (1) he is a qualified … Court gave 28 leave to amend in order to allow Plaintiff to include a short and plain statement of the factual 1 || allegations that support each claim, Plaintiff's complaint is difficult to understand and does not 2 clearly

(PC) Solis v. Unknown

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

Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988) (establishing the prison mailbox rule); Campbell v. … To establish a claim of deliberate indifference arising from a delay in providing care, 21 a plaintiff must show that the delay was harmful. See Berry v.

J.F. v. City of Woodlake

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 8, 2024

If only a portion 16 or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 17 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). … If only a portion or portions of the material 26 on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 27 portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins).