Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
6,306 results
0.28s
District Court, E.D. California · Apr 20, 2020
“[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 14 standard which a plaintiff must meet in order to establish “deliberate indifference.” Negligence is 15 insufficient.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · May 13, 2020
“Clearly Established Federal Law” 2 The phrase “clearly established Federal law” in § 2254(d)(1) refers to the “governing 3 legal principle or principles” previously articulated by the Supreme … Only Supreme Court precedent may constitute “clearly established 5 Federal law,” but courts may look to circuit law “to ascertain whether…the particular point in 6 issue is clearly established by Supreme Court precedent
Cited 0 timesUnknownScoggin v. Turning Point Central California
District Court, E.D. California · Mar 27, 2020
Stahl, 254 F.3d 845 (9th Cir. 2001) (dismissal required of in forma pauperis 2 proceedings which seek monetary relief from immune defendants); Cato v. … A plaintiff can establish a discrimination claim under a 17 theory of disparate treatment, or disparate impact, or failure to make reasonable 18 accommodations.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Mar 4, 2020
The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous when it is based on an 14 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 15 490 U.S. at 327. … class action.1 Plaintiff may only raise his own 23 claims, not generalized claims as to other inmates. 24 //// 25 1 It is well established
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jan 7, 2020
even if their dental care violated the Constitution, 20 they are entitled to qualified immunity. 21 Plaintiff contends that he was not experiencing increased pain in tooth #25, and although … County of Kern, 45 F.3d 1310, 1316 (9th Cir. 1995). 16 Even gross negligence is insufficient to establish deliberate indifference to serious medical needs. See 17 Wood v.
Cited 0 timesUnknown(SS) Crane v. Commissioner of Social Security
District Court, E.D. California · Jan 21, 2025
Astrue, 533 F.3d 1035, 8 1038 (9th Cir. 2008). 9 To qualify for benefits under the Social … Security Act, a plaintiff must establish that 10 he or she is unable to engage in substantial gainful activity due to a medically determinable physical or mental impairment that has lasted or can be expected
Cited 0 timesUnknownBRYAN WILLIAMS v. SIERRA DONOR SERVICES, et al.
District Court, E.D. California · Nov 25, 2025
(Id. at ¶ 9.) 4 Around April 2024, plaintiff applied for a “Quality Administrative” position, for which he was 5 qualified. … Placer Dome, Inc., 582 F.3d 12 1083, 1087 (9th Cir. 2009) (“The defendant bears the burden of establishing that removal is 13 proper.”).
Cited 0 timesUnknown(PS) Nelson Rogers v. Enjalran
District Court, E.D. California · Sep 21, 2020
(See ECF No. 62 (“The U.S. 28 Government has waived its sovereign immunity pursuant to 12 U.S.C. § 3417, which provides 1 taxpayers a cause of action for damages against the United States for knowing or negligent 2 … Instead, plaintiff claims 13 that the IRS improperly inspected her taxpayer information while either accessing or attempting 14 to collect plaintiff’s taxes, activities clearly contemplated by Section 6103.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Feb 8, 2023
frivolous 27 or malicious, if it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or if it seeks monetary 28 1 relief from a defendant who is immune … As a basic 16 matter, the complaint does not clearly allege what happened. With the exception of the acts of 17 Defendant Hurtado and Coronado, it is unclear what happened.
Cited 0 timesUnknownBaker Farming Partnership v. Nutrien Ag Solutions, Inc.
District Court, E.D. California · Aug 5, 2022
Placer Dome, Inc., 582 F.3d 1083, 1087 (9th Cir. 2009) (“The defendant bears the 20 burden of establishing that removal is proper.”). … Defendants 26 have not clearly explained how Nutrien would qualify as a registrant under this statutory scheme, 27 given that Nutrien appears to be a dealer or agent selling Saber and thus would appear to fall into 28
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jul 8, 2020
the action.’”). 5 When a defendant challenges a prisoner-plaintiff’s right to proceed in forma pauperis, 6 the defendant bears the burden of producing sufficient evidence to establish … the Order dismissing the appeal for failure to prosecute, (id. at 41). 23 When the Ninth Circuit relies on the district court’s certification that an appeal was not 24 taken in good faith, the dismissed appeal “clearly
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jun 28, 2024
Plaintiff must 3 clearly state what happened, when it happened, and who was involved. 4 B. … The Eighth 11 Amendment right to food was clearly established as of at least 2001. Foster v. Runnels, 554 F.3d 12 807, 815 (9th Cir. 2009).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · May 2, 2022
granted,” or that “seek[] monetary 27 28 1 relief against a defendant who is immune … As to the subjective prong of the Eighth Amendment 12 analysis, prisoners must establish prison officials' “deliberate indifference” to the unconstitutional 13 conditions of confinement to establish an Eighth Amendment
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Mar 17, 2026
Rodriguez, 583 U.S. 281, 288 (2018). 15 While the text of section 1225(b)(2)(A) limits its reach to applicants “seeking admission,” 16 section 1226(a) does not include the same qualifying language. … At this hearing, the government shall bear the burden of 7 | establishing, by clear and convincing evidence, that petitioner poses a danger to the community or 8 | arisk of flight, and petitioner shall be allowed to
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Dec 6, 2023
complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are 23 “frivolous, malicious, or fail[] to state a claim upon which relief may be granted,” or that “seek[] 24 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … “[A] judge may dismiss . . . claims which are ‘based on indisputably meritless legal 28 theories’ or whose ‘factual contentions are clearly baseless.’” Jackson v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownHargrove v. City of Bakersfield
District Court, E.D. California · Oct 7, 2019
The Court will 10 bar use of the evidence in question only if the moving party establishes that the evidence clearly is not 11 admissible for any valid purpose. … immunity.
Cited 0 timesUnknown(HC) Dynes v. Fresno County Superior Court
District Court, E.D. California · Jan 15, 2021
Andrade, 538 U.S. 63, 70-71 (2003); Williams, 529 18 U.S. at 412-413. 19 A state court decision is “contrary to” clearly established federal law “if it applies … The state courts determined that Petitioner did 20 not qualify for a reduction of his sentence under Proposition 47. (LD 20, LD 22.)
Cited 0 timesUnknownRocky Mountain Farmers Union v. Goldstene
843 F. Supp. 2d 1071 · District Court, E.D. California · Dec 29, 2011
Clearly, a law that compels the use of in-state products or forbids the use of out-of-state products would violate the Commerce Clause. See, Alliance for Clean Coal v. Miller, 44 F.3d 591, 596 (7th Cir.1995). … California has failed to establish this fact.
Cited 4 timesPublishedEstate of Gabriel Strickland v. Nevada County
District Court, E.D. California · Sep 28, 2021
See Mot., ECF No. 14, at 11-12. 27 10 There is no need to address Defendants’ alternate argument that they were entitled to qualified 28 immunity … “Title VII of the ADA 21 prohibits a public entity from discriminating against any qualified individual with a 22 disability. Title VII applies to arrests.” Id. (cleaned up).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jul 1, 2020
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. … A 8 showing of merely negligent medical care is not enough to establish a constitutional violation. 9 Frost v. Agnos, 152 F.3d 1124, 1130 (9th Cir. 1998), citing Estelle, 429 U.S. at 105-106.
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna