Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
6,306 results
0.95s
District Court, E.D. California · Jan 14, 2022
In the alternative, defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified 24 immunity. … Qualified Immunity 14 Qualified immunity shields government officials from monetary damages unless their 15 conduct violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jun 16, 2023
State officials are 24 entitled to qualified immunity from a § 1983 suit unless “(1) they violated a federal statutory or 25 constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established at … Step Two: Whether the Right Was Clearly Established 2 “Under the second prong of the qualified immunity test, we ask whether the alleged 3 violation of [plaintiff’s] Fourth Amendment right against excessive
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jan 15, 2021
to qualified immunity. … (Mot. 5-7.) 6 The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from civil liability 7 where “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of 8 which
Cited 0 timesUnknownKelley v. Corrections Corporation of America
750 F. Supp. 2d 1132 · District Court, E.D. California · Sep 30, 2010
There is nothing in Swonke that clearly allocates the burden to the plaintiff to allege in the complaint that engaging in the interactive process would not have been futile. … Underground Construction Co., 69 Cal.App.3d 933, 944 , 138 Cal.Rptr. 419 (1977) (facts and circumstances of fraud should be set out clearly, concisely, and with sufficient particularity to support punitive damages); Smith
Cited 43 timesPublishedVelente-Hook v. Eastern Plumas Health Care
368 F. Supp. 2d 1084 · District Court, E.D. California · Apr 28, 2005
Instead, the evidence clearly shows that defendant simply did not consider a personal leave of absence. … Defendant apparently seeks to establish that plaintiff was not qualified to work at Loyalton Hospital.
Cited 9 timesPublished290 F. Supp. 2d 1169 · District Court, E.D. California · Aug 15, 2003
. § 7433 (a), does not waive the federal government’s sovereign immunity in this instance for three reasons. … The court may not redraft Plaintiffs complaint in a fashion to establish a claim against another defendant.
Cited 1 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. California · Oct 13, 2021
Qualified Immunity 7 “Government officials enjoy qualified immunity from civil damages unless their conduct 8 violates ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … Pearson, 555 U.S. at 236-42. 23 “[S]ummary judgment based on qualified immunity is improper if, under the plaintiff’s 24 version of the facts, and in light of the clearly established
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Mar 8, 2024
Qualified Immunity 27 Defendant Gosso also argues that she is entitled to qualified immunity because … (ECF No. 59-1, p. 21). 4 “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established
Cited 0 timesUnknownCounty of Madera v. Picayune Rancheria of the Chukchansi Indians
467 F. Supp. 2d 993 · District Court, E.D. California · Dec 18, 2006
However, the Court lacks jurisdiction because the face of the complaint shows that no federal causes of action are pled and the Supreme Court, in a case that postdates Oneida, Santa Rosa, and Cabazon, has clearly held that … tribal immunity is a defense and is no basis for finding a federal question.
Cited 2 timesPublished(PC) Gregory E. Shehee (Civil Detainee) v. Redding
District Court, E.D. California · Jun 30, 2020
“The second prong of the qualified-immunity analysis 18 asks whether the right in question was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the violation.” Id. at 656 19 (citation omitted). … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 22 236 (2009). 23 In analyzing the second prong of qualified immunity, the Court notes that clearly established 24 law must be defined
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jul 15, 2022
’ conduct 6 violated “clearly established” federal law. … immunity, 16 they are irrelevant to whether the law at issue was clearly 17 established.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jan 17, 2023
“For purposes of qualified immunity, that legal duty need not be litigated and then established 7 disease by disease or injury by injury.” Estate of Clark v. … To hold otherwise as a matter of law would provide qualified immunity to Defendants even 16 if they had done nothing in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. 17 ...
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Apr 21, 2025
Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 675. 28 The doctrine of qualified immunity “protects government officials from ‘liability for civil 1 damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … issue was clearly established at the time of the defendant's alleged misconduct.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Aug 27, 2025
Qualified Immunity 10 In the alternative, Defendant asserts that she is entitled to qualified immunity in this case 11 because no official in her position would believe … The plaintiff bears the burden 1 | of establishing that the right alleged was clearly established. Moran v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Sep 13, 2021
right; and 22 (2) whether the right was clearly established. … were clearly 6 established at the time it was taken.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Apr 5, 2024
established that individuals in government 16 || custody have a constitutional right to be protected against a heightened risk of exposure to serious 17 || and easily communicable diseases, including COVID-19. … Therefore, the court will not dismiss the First Amended Complaint based on qualified 20 || immunity. 21 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 22 1.
Cited 0 timesUnknownCalifornia ex rel. Younger v. Blumenthal
457 F. Supp. 1309 · District Court, E.D. California · Oct 3, 1978
Nor is there any basis for limiting the applicability of Section 6058(a) to employers maintaining qualified plans. … That part describes nonqualified as well as qualified plans. The scope of ERISA itself is, of course, not limited to qualified plans — its remedial provisions are intended to reach deferred compensation plans generally.
Cited 3 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. California · Aug 4, 2025
immunity 26 doctrine. … Because there is no genuine issue of material fact as to whether defendant’s conduct 27 violated a clearly established constitutional right, summary judgment based on qualified immunity is also appropriate.
Cited 0 timesUnknownWalter W. Wells v. County of Stanislaus
District Court, E.D. California · Sep 14, 2022
Qualified Immunity 27 City Defendants argue Evers is entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate 28 clearly established law. (ECF No. 66 at 26.) … (ECF No. 79 at 23.) 3 In § 1983 actions, qualified immunity “protects government officials from civil liability 4 where ‘their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Aug 15, 2025
Defendants also argue that all 2 defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because none of them hold the power to approve or 3 deny requests for spinal surgeries and because it is not clearly established by law that … Therefore, the Court need not consider the 27 || second prong of the qualified immunity analysis: whether the right at issue was “clearly established” at the time of the alleged misconduct. See Pearson v.
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna