Case law

Darby

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 2, 2026

the existence of a factual dispute, the opposing party need not 14 establish a material issue of fact conclusively in its favor. … Instead, as discussed in detail above, the 2 evidence clearly shows that SHRA employees considered plaintiff’s request for a second 3 bedroom as a reasonable accommodation, investigated the basis for the request, and

(PC) Davis v. County of Sacramento

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 24, 2021

“[A] judge may dismiss . . . claims which are ‘based on indisputably meritless legal 2 theories’ or whose ‘factual contentions are clearly baseless.’” Jackson v. … Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (1994), the Supreme Court established a very strict 21 standard which a plaintiff must meet in order to establish “deliberate indifference.” Negligence is 22 insufficient.

(PC) Martinez v. Lopez

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 25, 2023

The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an 10 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 11 490 U.S. at 327. … The allegations in the complaint establish a delay 9 in providing plaintiff with medical attention related to his I.V. line.

Ozer Holdings, LLC v. Citibank, National Association

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

’ wire transfer instructions, as 16 required to establish liability under section 11207 of the California Commercial Code. … They “cannot have [their] cake and 13 eat it too,” and section 11207 clearly covers the circumstances giving rise to Joint and Ozer’s 14 common law claim.

Distaso

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 31, 2025

In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the 18 court will (1) accept as true all factual allegations contained in the complaint, unless they are 19 clearly baseless or fanciful, (2) construe those allegations in … Id. at 46. 10 The FAC interprets this as proof that the evidence presented at trial established Plaintiff’s 11 innocence and right to custody. Id. at 47.

Rockwell v. Tuolumne County, California

District Court, E.D. California · Nov 15, 2022

According to Plaintiff, Defendants “violated clearly established law by acting 5 consciously, and deliberately indifferent” to Plaintiff’s rights … For that same reason, Defendant Brouhard is entitled to qualified immunity. (Id. at 9). 21 Plaintiff’s complaint also fails to show a causal connection between Defendant Brouhard’s 22 actions and any deprivation.

(PC) Threlkeld v. McKay

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

Plaintiff argues that religious meals 1 qualify as a “basic need,” and that failure to provide the meals imposed an atypical and 2 significant hardship. … Lewis, 217 F.3d 726, 731 (9th Cir. 2006). 28 Mere negligence on the part of a prison official is not sufficient to establish liability, but rather, 1 the official’s conduct must have been wanton.

(PC) Diaz v. Burton

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

complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner raised claims that are legally 7 “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek 8 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … The requisite causal connection 22 between a supervisor’s wrongful conduct and the violation of the prisoner’s constitutional rights 23 can be established in a number of ways, including by demonstrating that a supervisor

(PC) Martinez, Jr. v. Pogue

District Court, E.D. California · Nov 15, 2024

establish subjective knowledge of a high degree of risk or serious injury. … (ECF No. 11 at 10–11). 16 The culture established under the authority of Madera County Department of 17 Corrections is clearly enforced in Defendant Pogue’s jail.

(PC) Sharpe v. Sherman

District Court, E.D. California · Nov 7, 2019

or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are 17 legally “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or 18 that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … The amended complaint should be clearly and boldly titled “First 21 Amended Complaint,” refer to the appropriate case number, and be an original signed under 22 penalty of perjury.

(PC) Rodriguez v. Newsom

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 15, 2022

or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally 28 “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek 1 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … As to the subjective prong of the Eighth Amendment analysis, 27 prisoners must establish prison officials’ “deliberate indifference” to unconstitutional conditions 28 of confinement to establish an Eighth Amendment violation

ProtectMarriage.com v. Bowen

830 F. Supp. 2d 914 · District Court, E.D. California · Nov 4, 2011

In light of clearly established precedent, this Court is unable to say that the State’s interest here is similarly diminished or that the Plaintiffs’ potential burden is even remotely comparable. … However labeled, the Buckley Court clearly determined that the $100 threshold passed constitutional muster and this Court is bound by that decision.

(PS) Newson v. Chen

District Court, E.D. California · May 31, 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 … Accordingly, Title 18 of the 24 United States Code does not establish any private right of action and cannot support a civil 25 lawsuit. See Aldabe v.

Estate of Carmen Mendez v. City of Ceres

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 26, 2019

Order must be clearly so 4 designated before the material is disclosed or produced. 5 Designation in conformity with this Order requires: 6 (a) for information in documentary … A sealing order 16 will issue only upon a request establishing that the Protected Material at issue is privileged, 17 protectable as a trade secret, or otherwise entitled to protection under the law.

(PC) Kern v. Ho

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 10, 2025

complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner raised claims that are legally 8 “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek 9 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … However, it is well established that “a mere 12 difference of medical opinion . . . [is] insufficient, as a matter of law, to establish deliberate 13 indifference.”

(PC) Brown v. Baughman

District Court, E.D. California · Feb 11, 2020

“[A] judge may dismiss [in forma pauperis] claims which are based on indisputably 8 meritless legal theories or whose factual contentions are clearly baseless.” Jackson v. … He appears to allege that 18 he undertook actions to “establish and promote the ‘peace agreement to end all hostilities’” on 19 behalf of this group.

Sierra Nevada Forest Protection Campaign v. Rey

573 F. Supp. 2d 1316 · District Court, E.D. California · Aug 1, 2008

An agency must be permitted discretion in relying on the reasonable opinions of its own qualified experts, even if the court might find contrary views more persuasive. … United States, 192 F.3d 922 , 924 (9th Cir.1999) for this proposition under NEPA and NFMA, respectively), a party can obtain judicial review of alleged violations of NEPA only under the waiver of sovereign immunity contained

(PC) Gallegos v. Sahota

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 8, 2025

complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner raised claims that are legally 23 “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek 24 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous when it is based on an 28 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 1 490 U.S. at 327.

Mort v. Brennan

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 10, 2022

The 21 Court will bar use of the evidence in question only if the moving party establishes that the 22 evidence clearly is not admissible for any valid purpose. … Mort’s claims because it does not qualify as 19 comparator evidence.

(PS) Leonard v. Bu

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

Under the IFP statute, the court must screen the complaint and dismiss any claims that are 25 “frivolous or malicious,” fail to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seek monetary 26 relief against an immune … A 28 showing of merely negligent medical care is not enough to establish a constitutional violation. 1 Frost v. Agnos, 152 F.3d 1124, 1130 (9th Cir. 1998), citing Estelle, 429 U.S. at 105-106.