Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
6,306 results
2.61s
W. v. Turlock Unified School District
District Court, E.D. California · Jul 1, 2020
Any Documents, Testimony or Information to be designated as “Confidential” must 3 be clearly so designated before the Document, Testimony or Information is 4 Disclosed or produced. … The Designating Party shall have the burden on any Designation Motion of 15 establishing
Cited 0 timesUnknown(PC) Dunbar v. California Corrections Department
District Court, E.D. California · Aug 4, 2020
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. … By establishing the existence of a serious medical need, a prisoner satisfies the 10 objective requirement for proving an Eighth Amendment violation. Farmer v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownREV Robotics LLC v. WestCoast Products & Design LLC
District Court, E.D. California · Aug 19, 2025
Except as otherwise provided in this Order or 16 as otherwise stipulated or ordered, discovery material and information that qualify for protection 17 under this Order must be clearly so designated before the material … This provision 4 is not intended to modify whatever procedure may be established in an e-discovery order that 5 provides for production without prior privilege review.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Nov 12, 2020
a failure to protect claim, the prisoner must establish that prison officials 2 were deliberately indifferent to a sufficiently serious threat to the prisoner’s safety. … Abbey, 263 F.3d 1070, 1074-75 (9th Cir. 2001) (en banc) 4 (“[T]here is a clearly established constitutional due process right not to be subjected to criminal 5 charges on the basis of false evidence that was deliberately
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jan 28, 2025
Plaintiffs should 14 have addressed the proper amount of security clearly and at the outset. … It offers free or low-cost health coverage to people who qualify.” Cal. Dep’t Health Care Servs., Medi-Cal, https://www.dhcs.ca.gov/Medi- Cal/Pages/home.aspx (visited Jan. 28, 2025).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Apr 16, 2021
“[A] judge may dismiss . . . claims which are ‘based on indisputably meritless legal 12 theories’ or whose ‘factual contentions are clearly baseless.’” Jackson v. … To meet this causation requirement, the plaintiff must establish 4 both causation-in-fact and proximate causation”).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Nov 23, 2020
Tawyea 8 was granted immunity and testified for the prosecution. … Clearly, defense counsel was aware of the evidence in 1983.
Cited 0 timesUnknownCal-Pac Rancho Cordova, LLC v. United States Department of the Interior
District Court, E.D. California · Dec 8, 2021
. § 2719(b)(1)(A) permits gaming if: (1) the Secretary determines that a gaming 23 establishment on newly acquired trust lands would be in the tribe’s best interest and not detrimental to the surrounding community; … Davis, 21 Cal. 22 4th 585 (1999),” wherein the California Supreme Court explained that the State had waived 23 immunity to give effect to IGRA’s remedial framework. Club One I, 328 F.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jun 25, 2021
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 … In order to state a cause of action for deprivation of procedural due process, a 23 plaintiff must first establish the existence of a liberty interest for which protection is sought. 24 A prisoner does not have a
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jul 24, 2020
Plaintiff’s complaint does not clearly establish whether plaintiff was 24 not allowed at the administrative appeal hearing or if plaintiff’s preferred witnesses were not 25 allowed at the administrative appeal hearing … Because plaintiff does not clearly explain how Sergeant Fisk and 15 Sergeant Morris’s actions violated plaintiff’s constitutional rights, plaintiff has failed to establish 16 a cognizable claim against Sergeant Morris
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Apr 9, 2020
Allen told plaintiff Olivas and Lizarraga were concerned that plaintiff was trying 10 to establish a relationship with Grimes. … See id. at 556–57, 571–72 n.19. 18 Wolff established five constitutionally mandated procedural requirements for disciplinary 19 proceedings.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Nov 24, 2020
Because Saloum is a 19 qualified professional, the Youngberg professional judgment standard applies. Further, as a 20 qualified professional, Saloum’s decision is presumed to be valid. … Ctr., 120 Cal.App.4th 1289, 1302- 27 03 (2004) (applying California tort law and explaining that expert testimony is generally required to establish a health care practitioner’s breach of the professional standard of
Cited 0 timesUnknownHamidi v. Service Employees International Union Local 1000
District Court, E.D. California · Oct 25, 2019
explicitly stated that it did not decide whether or not the 7 private defendants before it might assert, not immunity … of the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Clement to argue that 6 defendant’s actions do not qualify
Cited 0 timesUnknownMartini E Ricci Lamino S.P.A.-Consortile Societa Agricola v. Trinity Fruit Sales Co.
30 F. Supp. 3d 954 · District Court, E.D. California · Jul 2, 2014
However, the evidence as presented does not establish that M & R is attempting to do this. … document or portion of a document that is written in a language other than English, that party must ensure that some form of translation into English is provided, that the translation is accurate, and that the translator was qualified
Cited 11 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. California · Mar 16, 2023
complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are 9 “frivolous, malicious, or fail[] to state a claim upon which relief may be granted,” or that “seek[] 10 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … “[A] judge may dismiss . . . claims which are ‘based on indisputably meritless legal 14 theories’ or whose ‘factual contentions are clearly baseless.’” Jackson v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Apr 25, 2022
“[A] judge may dismiss . . . claims which are ‘based on indisputably meritless legal 13 theories’ or whose ‘factual contentions are clearly baseless.’” Jackson v. … He also fails to state a claim against Yuba 7 County because it is immune under California Government Code § 844.6. See Gates v. Superior 8 Ct., 32 Cal.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Nov 17, 2025
MCSP and/or CDCR) or 6 otherwise discriminated against by a public entity and that he was otherwise qualified to 7 participate or receive those benefits. … Rowland, 65 F.3d 802, 806 (9th Cir. 1995) (to prevail on a retaliation claim, plaintiff “need not 3 establish an independent constitutional interest” was violated); cf. Rizzo v.
Cited 0 timesUnknown(PC) Holguin v. Madera County Jail Captain 2015
District Court, E.D. California · Dec 13, 2022
Even so, the complaint herein clearly demonstrates that Plaintiff knew in 7 2015 that his rights were being violated by Defendants and that he attempted to pursue exhaustion 8 as follows. … However, an 19 inmate alleging denial of access to the court cannot establish a claim simply by establishing the 20 law library or legal assistance is subpar in a theoretical sense. Lewis, 518 U.S. at 351.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Nov 21, 2019
Plaintiff’s 20 lengthy narrative does not clearly or succinctly allege facts against the named Defendants. … In order to invoke 10 the protection of the Due Process Clause, a plaintiff must first establish the existence of a liberty 11 interest for which the protection is sought. Id.
Cited 0 timesUnknown(SS) Ward v. Commissioner of Social Security
District Court, E.D. California · Mar 31, 2020
Timeliness of a Social Security Appeal 27 It is well-established that the United States is immune from suit without its consent. See, e.g., 28 United States v. … Because the time limit is 21 “a condition on the waiver of sovereign immunity,” it “must be strictly construed.” Id.
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna