Case law

(PC) King v. Lemos

District Court, E.D. California · May 21, 2021

The CDCR is a state agency and is 7 therefore immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment. See Will v. … Halderman, 465 U.S. 89, 100 (1984) (holding that Eleventh Amendment immunity extends to 12 state agencies.) The CDCR is immune from suit. 13 D.

(PS) Kimball v. Sacramento's DA's Office

District Court, E.D. California · May 28, 2025

forma pauperis 1 proceeding, and must order dismissal of the case if it is “frivolous or malicious,” “fails to 2 state a claim on which relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief against a 3 defendant who is immune … In 6 reviewing a complaint under this standard, the court accepts as true the factual 7 allegations contained in the complaint, unless they are clearly baseless or fanciful, and 8 construes those allegations in the

Knickerbocker v. United States Department of Interior, Death Valley National Park, National Park Service

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 24, 2020

Plaintiff counters that the use of force 8 was unreasonable under clearly established law. (Doc. No. 93 at 11.) … answer to (1) is yes, was that constitutional right clearly established at the time of the injury?

Newsom

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 8, 2026

or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally 26 “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek 27 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … 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.

(PC) Adams v. Wong

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

complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner raised claims that are legally 6 “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek 7 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous when it is based on an 11 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 12 490 U.S. at 327.

Baraona

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 27, 2026

The Court will grant a motion in limine 1 precluding use of evidence only if the moving party establishes that the evidence clearly is not 2 admissible for any valid purpose. … A 7 finding that a defendant is not protected by qualified immunity does not automatically mean that 8 punitive damages should be awarded. Hernandez-Tirado v. Artau, 874 F.2d 866, 870 (1st Cir. 9 1989).

(PS) Rubang v. Ally Financial Inc.

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 27, 2019

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.

(PC) Penate v. Cayanan Manno

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 12, 2022

The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an 21 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 22 490 U.S. at 327. … By establishing the existence of a serious medical need, a prisoner satisfies the 2 objective requirement for proving an Eighth Amendment violation. Farmer v.

Arceo v. City of Roseville

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 22, 2023

App. 5th 226, 233 (2017), as modified (Aug. 14, 6 2017) (“The Bane Act does not override statutory immunities[.]”). … In the Ninth Circuit, the risk of 13 suicide or an attempted suicide qualifies as a serious medical need. See Conn v. City of Reno, 591 14 F.3d 1081, 1095 (9th Cir. 2010), cert. granted, judgment vacated sub nom.

(PC) Rabiee v. Shasta County Correctional Facility

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 24, 2020

As plaintiff claims that defendants’ 11 actions caused him to miss a deadline with the California courts, this case is “backward-looking.” 12 To state a claim for denial of access to the courts, a plaintiff must establish … The amended complaint should be clearly titled, in 26 bold font, “Second Amended Complaint,” reference the appropriate case number, and be an original 27 signed under penalty of perjury.

(PC) Odom v. Taylor

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 4, 2024

Lastly, Defendants contend they are entitled to qualified immunity. 26 (Id. at 21.) … immunity. 99.

(PC) Turner v. Central California Women's Facility

District Court, E.D. California · May 23, 2023

“The requisite 14 causal connection may be established when an official sets in motion a ‘series of acts by others 15 which the actor knows or reasonably should know would cause others to inflict’ constitutional 16 … It does not clearly set forth facts supporting Plaintiff’s claims.” (ECF No. 9, p. 9). 17 Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint suffers from these same defects.

(PC) Hernandez v. Covello

District Court, E.D. California · May 2, 2022

The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an 2 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 3 490 U.S. at 327. … By establishing the existence of a serious medical need, a prisoner satisfies the 8 objective requirement for proving an Eighth Amendment violation. Farmer v.

Lennar Mare Island, LLC v. Steadfast Insurance

176 F. Supp. 3d 949 · District Court, E.D. California · Mar 31, 2016

This language clearly explains the parties’ intent: the DTSC agreement is an order and “Government Authority.” Both LMI and Steadfast seem to agree. See Auth. Mem. 5; Auth. Opp’n at 1. … The evidence about the 2005 meeting establishes no ambiguity about section six’s language.

(PC) Davis v. Uddin

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 26, 2022

The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an 24 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 25 490 U.S. at 327. … In evaluating a prisoner’s 9 claim, courts consider whether “‘the officials act[ed] with a sufficiently culpable state of mind’ 10 and if the alleged wrongdoing was objectively ‘harmful enough’ to establish a constitutional

(PC) Ellis v. Williams

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 11, 2024

(ECF No. 12 at 13.) 8 At an appointment in August 2022, Williams told plaintiff he was not qualified to take 9 measurements for a wheelchair. … Plaintiff is advised that in 5 an amended complaint he must clearly identify each defendant and the action that defendant took 6 that violated his legal rights.

Environment Now! v. Espy

877 F. Supp. 1397 · District Court, E.D. California · Aug 23, 1994

Sisco’s criticisms of the failure to survey the entire Fish sale area is rebutted by the fact that some of the sale area is rock outcrops or brushfields, which are clearly unsuitable habitat, and a “waste of time” to survey … P(8)(f): AR 288 states that “Qualifying timber sale receipts generated by [Alternative 4] are expected to return approximately $163,625 to Fresno, Kern, and Tulare Counties.

(PC) Ontiveros v. Eldridge

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

complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally 6 “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek 7 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Nov. 1, 2010) (citing Helling v. 5 McKinney, 509 U.S. 25 (1993)) (in proving that a deprivation of rights violated the Eighth 6 Amendment, inmate must establish some degree of actual or potential injury and that society

Schmuckley v. Rite Aid Corporation

District Court, E.D. California · Oct 16, 2020

While “the right to inspect and 15 copy judicial records is not absolute,” access in civil cases is properly denied for clearly 16 justifiable reasons: to protect against “‘gratif[ication of] private spite or promot[ion … To establish good cause, a party must show “for each 8 particular document it seeks to protect . . . that specific prejudice or harm will result” absent 9 sealing. See Foltz, 331 F.3d at 1130 (citation omitted).

Mlodzianowski v. Markus

District Court, E.D. California · May 18, 2022

If only a portion of the material on a page 7 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 8 portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). 9 A Party … If only 18 a portion of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 19 must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in 20 the margins).