Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
6,306 results
0.73s
District Court, E.D. California · Jun 5, 2023
Only Supreme Court precedent may constitute “clearly established 11 Federal law,” but courts may look to circuit law “to ascertain whether…the particular point in 12 issue is clearly established by Supreme Court precedent … of federal habeas 14 corpus relief if not forbidden by ‘clearly established Federal law,’ as laid out by the Supreme 15 Court.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Oct 3, 2024
Cal. 25 Jan. 25, 2022) (“Plaintiff's indigence does not qualify ‘as an exceptional circumstance in a 26 prisoner civil rights case’”); Gipbsin v. Kernan, No. 2:12-cv-0556 KJM DB P, 2021 WL 242570, 27 at *2 (E.D. … or portion thereof if the prisoner has 10 raised claims that are legally “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief 11 may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Oct 3, 2024
Cal. 25 Jan. 25, 2022) (“Plaintiff's indigence does not qualify ‘as an exceptional circumstance in a 26 prisoner civil rights case’”); Gipbsin v. Kernan, No. 2:12-cv-0556 KJM DB P, 2021 WL 242570, 27 at *2 (E.D. … or portion thereof if the prisoner has 10 raised claims that are legally “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief 11 may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Oct 3, 2024
Cal. 25 Jan. 25, 2022) (“Plaintiff's indigence does not qualify ‘as an exceptional circumstance in a 26 prisoner civil rights case’”); Gipbsin v. Kernan, No. 2:12-cv-0556 KJM DB P, 2021 WL 242570, 27 at *2 (E.D. … or portion thereof if the prisoner has 10 raised claims that are legally “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief 11 may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune
Cited 0 timesUnknown334 F. Supp. 2d 1206 · District Court, E.D. California · Sep 8, 2004
But the two statutes are clearly different. … Defendants have presented some evidence that the methods of qualifying for the credentials have been altered and that some of the substantive requirements have changed in minor ways.
Cited 3 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. California · Feb 27, 2025
Plaintiff has failed to allege facts establishing that the Defendants substantially burdened 11 the practice of his religion by preventing him from engaging in conduct mandated by his faith. 12 Plaintiff has been unable … injunction 9 that goes beyond maintaining the status quo pendente lite, ‘courts should be extremely cautious’ 10 about issuing a preliminary injunction and should not grant such relief unless the facts and law 11 clearly
Cited 0 timesUnknown(PS) Wood v. Redding Police Department
District Court, E.D. California · May 11, 2022
“[A] judge may dismiss . . . claims which are ‘based on indisputably meritless legal 14 theories’ or whose ‘factual contentions are clearly baseless.’” Jackson v. … (internal citations 22 omitted). 23 Each element is clearly satisfied in this case.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jul 24, 2023
The Court does not find 9 Plaintiff’s allegations qualify as a viable retaliation claim. … Robinson, 914 F.2d 486, 492 (4th Cir. 1990) (finding 10 no clearly established, sufficiently contoured, right to hot showers in prison)).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Sep 23, 2020
“A showing of 1 medical malpractice or negligence is insufficient to establish a constitutional deprivation under 2 the Eighth Amendment.” Id. at 1060. … “[E]ven gross negligence is insufficient to establish a 3 constitutional violation.” Id. (citing Wood v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Oct 25, 2022
130, 146-47 (2012), abrogated on other grounds by ZB, N.A., and Zions Bancorporation v. 18 Superior Court, 8 Cal.5th 175, 252 Cal.Rptr.3d 228, 448 P.3d 239 (2019) (statutory language or 19 legislative history must clearly … The amended complaint should be clearly and boldly 3 titled “Second Amended Complaint,” refer to the appropriate case number, and be an original 4 signed under penalty of perjury.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · May 5, 2026
Plaintiff’s 15 complaint does not clearly state what happened, when it happened related to his treatment, and 16 who was involved. … Even gross 4 negligence is insufficient to establish deliberate indifference to serious medical needs. See Wood 5 v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Sep 30, 2022
While past negligence or claimed negligence cannot be used to 24 establish negligence in this case, see Fed. R. … Cal. 2006) (like the attorney-client privilege, a party claiming 12 work product immunity has the burden of proving the applicability of the doctrine).
Cited 0 timesUnknownEstate of Antonio Thomas v. County of Sacramento
District Court, E.D. California · Jul 1, 2021
“[R]eview under 16 the ‘clearly erroneous’ standard is significantly deferential . . . .” Id. at 623. 17 III. … Sept. 15, 2020) (applying Rule 26(c) and determining that “[t]o 6 establish good cause, a party must show for each particular document it seeks to protect . . . that 7 specific prejudice or harm will result’ absent sealing
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Mar 24, 2026
s complaint, or any portion thereof, is subject to dismissal if it is frivolous 5 or malicious, if it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or if it seeks monetary 6 relief from a defendant who is immune … The BOP Administrative Remedy Program qualifies as an 12 alternative remedy. See Correctional Servs. Corp. v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownMeridian Project Systems, Inc. v. Hardin Construction Co.
426 F. Supp. 2d 1101 · District Court, E.D. California · Apr 6, 2006
Meridian’s claims are not based upon infringement of an idea, which is clearly not within the scope of copyright protection. … Rather, application of the doc *1113 trine serves to establish the appropriate standard needed to prove copying. 9 .
Cited 9 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. California · Oct 17, 2022
complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner raised claims that are legally 2 “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek 3 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous when 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.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Mar 17, 2022
or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally 14 “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek 15 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … To retaliate against a prisoner for exercising this right violates 17 the Constitution, and it is prohibited as a matter of clearly established law.
Cited 0 timesUnknown696 F. Supp. 505 · District Court, E.D. California · Aug 29, 1988
It is the responsibility of the Secretary to establish and maintain a CCL of commodities subject to export controls under the Act. 50 U.S.C. App. §§ 2403(b), 2404(c). … require any of the following types of export licenses for commodities falling within the scope of the Act: (1) a validated license, authorizing a specific export, issued pursuant to an application by the exporter; (2) a qualified
Cited 2 timesPublished(PS) Kidgell v. County of Merced
District Court, E.D. California · Jan 3, 2025
Amendment applies to the federal government, not state or local 15 government”; and (5) “disputes over possessory interests in land under the facts alleged invoke no 16 federal statutes, treaties, rights, privileges or immunities … The United States Supreme Court, the Ninth Circuit, and this 11 Court have clearly stated that federal land patents and acts of Congress alone do not provide 12 bases for federal question jurisdiction.
Cited 0 timesUnknownAerojet Rocketdyne, Inc. v. Global Aerospace, Inc.
District Court, E.D. California · Jan 14, 2021
While Payton did not “clearly 3 establish[] that an insurer’s claims investigation constitutes a standard business activity to which 4 no attorney-client privilege attaches,” see Sec. … While defendants contend “[t]he unrefuted evidence in the record 4 clearly establishes . . . draft documents were prepared in anticipation of litigation because at the 5 time of their preparation [defendants’] claims
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna