Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
6,306 results
1.01s
District Court, E.D. California · Aug 17, 2026
He 21 does not clearly allege what happened, when it happened, or who was involved. Plaintiff may not 22 simply refer to his exhibits, which total more than 50 pages. … Even gross 15 negligence is insufficient to establish deliberate indifference to serious medical needs. See Wood 16 v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Feb 27, 2023
need not 19 establish a material issue of fact conclusively in its favor. … Qualified Immunity 15 Considering these findings, the undersigned declines to address the issue of qualified 16 immunity.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jan 26, 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 … To establish a claim of deliberate indifference arising from delay in 12 providing care, a plaintiff must show that the delay was harmful. See Hallett v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jan 10, 2022
“[A] judge may dismiss . . . claims which are ‘based on indisputably meritless legal 6 theories’ or whose ‘factual contentions are clearly baseless.’” Jackson v. … Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (1994), the Supreme Court established a very strict 19 standard which a plaintiff must meet in order to establish “deliberate indifference.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Sep 14, 2020
Where holdings of the Supreme Court regarding the issue presented on habeas review are lacking, “it cannot be said that the state court ‘unreasonabl[y] appli[ed] clearly established Federal law.’” Carey v. … Absent such “clearly established Federal law,” it cannot be concluded that the appellate court’s ruling was an “unreasonable application.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownLowe v. California Forensic Medical Group, Inc.
District Court, E.D. California · May 11, 2021
See Medina-Velazquez, 767 F.3d at 111 2 (“For pleading purposes, [plaintiffs] need not establish 3 causation. … immunity. 1 City of Covina, 654 F.3d 892, 900 (9th Cir. 2011); Mabe v.
Cited 0 timesUnknown(PC) Guevara v. Superior Court County of San Mateo
District Court, E.D. California · Apr 24, 2020
In any amended complaint, Plaintiff must clearly state what 6 happened, when it happened and who was involved in the alleged violation of his rights. 7 2. … Even gross negligence is insufficient to establish deliberate indifference to 1 serious medical needs. See Wood v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Oct 6, 2020
When a battery 19 claim is asserted against a police officer, the plaintiff must also establish that the officer’s use of 20 force was unreasonable. Id. at 527. … The amended complaint shall clearly set forth the 26 allegations against each defendant and shall specify a basis for this court’s subject matter 27 jurisdiction.
Cited 0 timesUnknown(PC) Harding v. Sacramento County Sheriff Dept
District Court, E.D. California · Aug 9, 2021
The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an 12 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 13 490 U.S. at 327. … To prevail on a substantive due 3 process claim, plaintiff must establish that the restrictions imposed by his confinement constituted 4 punishment as opposed to being incident to legitimate governmental purposes.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Mar 31, 2020
complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are 7 “frivolous, malicious, or fail[] to state a claim upon which relief may be granted,” or that “seek[] 8 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … “[A] judge may dismiss . . . claims which are ‘based on indisputably meritless legal 12 theories’ or whose ‘factual contentions are clearly baseless.’” Jackson v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Sep 24, 2020
). 27 The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the complaint is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant 1 who is immune … The injury is clearly one 16 that a reasonable patient would find worthy of treatment, and Plaintiff alleges that it causes him 17 significant, chronic pain and affects his ability to chew.
Cited 0 timesUnknown(SS) Lazar v. Commissioner of Social Security
District Court, E.D. California · Sep 30, 2022
from the caselaw, it is not really the terminology utilized that is determinative of whether the ALJ 1 caselaw is largely confined to the sit/stand option, and those decisions relied on considerable 2 established … such sit/stand option to be an 3 accommodation that is essentially part of an occupation as generally performed in the economy. 4 Extensions of the principle outside of the sit/stand option involved testimony establishing
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Feb 5, 2025
complaint, or any portion thereof, is subject to dismissal if it is frivolous 28 or malicious, if it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or if it seeks monetary 1 relief from a defendant who is immune … “In the simplest and most absolute of terms ... prisoners [have a clearly 25 established Eighth Amendment right] to be free from sexual abuse ....” Schwenk, 204 F.3d at 26 1197.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Mar 23, 2026
15 The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the complaint is frivolous or malicious, 16 fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant 17 who is immune … Plaintiff contends Magallanes is “liable for the excessive force and failure to protect 9 because he clearly ordered defendant Florez to assault” him and Magallanes did nothing to stop or 10 intervene in the assault by
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jun 15, 2021
The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if it: (1) is frivolous or 22 malicious; (2) fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; or (3) seeks monetary relief 23 from a defendant who is immune … Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 676 (2009). 16 Plaintiff does not clearly or satisfactorily allege that Lightfiled participated in, 17 directed, or otherwise adequately knew of the allegedly unconstitutional actions of
Cited 0 timesUnknown318 F. Supp. 3d 1155 · District Court, E.D. California · Jul 9, 2018
"Although NEPA establishes procedures by which agencies must consider the environmental impacts of their actions, it does not dictate the substantive results of agency decision making." Id. … If we decide to use a CE, we will clearly identify the category." BR 471. On February 17, 2017, Irina Ford, a Forest Planner, wrote to Mr.
Cited 7 timesPublishedBarbosa v. Cargill Meat Solutions Corp.
297 F.R.D. 431 · District Court, E.D. California · Jul 2, 2013
Generally, “unless the settlement is clearly inadequate, its acceptance and approval are preferable to lengthy and expensive litigation with uncertain results.” Nat’l Rural Telecomms. Coop. v. … Litig., 396 F.3d 294, 306 (3d Cir.2005) (“The lodestar crosscheck calculation need entail neither mathematical precision nor bean-counting.”); In re Immune Response Sec.
Cited 86 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. California · Feb 24, 2026
Respondents note that although Plaintiff later pleaded guilty to simple 19 battery, a plain reading of § 1226(c)(E)(ii) only requires Petitioner to be arrested or charged with 20 a qualifying offense. … Any burden imposed by requiring Respondents to comply 21 with constitutionally required process is both de minimis and clearly outweighed by the 22 substantial harm Petitioner will suffer if he continues to be detained
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jul 30, 2020
“Retaliation against prisoners for their 20 exercise of this right is itself a constitutional violation, and prohibited as a matter of ‘clearly 21 established law.’” Brodheim v. … To establish a violation of this duty, 7 the prisoner must establish that prison officials were deliberately indifferent to serious threats to 8 the inmate’s safety. Farmer v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jan 10, 2025
Linkage and Supervisor Liability 18 Most of Plaintiff's allegations fail to assert the requisite causal link between the 19 challenged conduct, a specific defendant, and a clearly … Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 114 S.Ct. 1970, 16 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1970). 17 Here, Plaintiff has failed to establish that Defendant Warden, Defendant Deputy Warden, 18 or other
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna