Case law

California Ass'n of Rural Health Clinics v. Maxwell-Jolly

748 F. Supp. 2d 1184 · District Court, E.D. California · Oct 18, 2010

individual as a patient of a Federally-qualified health center .... ” Title 42 U.S.C. § 1395x(aa) defines both “rural health clinic services” and “Federally-qualified health center services” to include: “physicians’ services … language establishing a private right of action to enforce the provisions.

(PC) Fields v. Paramo

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 24, 2019

Button, 810 F.3d 609, 615 (9th Cir. 2015). 24 Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages as long 25 as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … established law for qualified immunity purposes is not to be 19 defined at a high level of generality.

Farmco Stores, Inc. v. Newmark

315 F. Supp. 396 · District Court, E.D. California · Jul 8, 1970

Some tests are well established. … However, the court’s thinking clearly indicates that it is distinguishable.

California v. Bowen

710 F. Supp. 739 · District Court, E.D. California · Mar 3, 1989

it has expressly waived its immunity and consented to be sued. … In 42 U.S.C. § 418 (t), 2 Congress expressly waived sovereign immunity for an action brought by a state. It made no such express waiver of immunity for actions brought by political subdivisions of a state.

South Yuba River Citizens League v. National Marine Fisheries Service

629 F. Supp. 2d 1123 · District Court, E.D. California · May 5, 2009

P. 12(b)(1) MOTION TO DISMISS It is well established that the party seeking to invoke the jurisdiction of the federal court has the burden of establishing that jurisdiction exists. KVOS, Inc. v. … Although Mount Graham did not discuss the remedies sought pursuant to plaintiffs’ claim, it clearly discussed an alleged violation of section 9. 3 .

(PC) Kester v. Kokor

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 3, 2023

Defendant further argues that plaintiff has failed to establish deliberate 15 indifference or that he is not entitled to qualified immunity. Id. at 9-12. 16 IV. … violate clearly established statutory or 13 constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

(PC) Walker v. King

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 10, 2020

Legal Standards for Qualified Immunity 23 “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for 24 civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly … clearly established at the time of the officer's alleged misconduct. 5 Pearson, 555 U.S. at 232.

Evans v. Jacobsen

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 9, 2021

14 immunity; (4) Jacobsen did not violate clearly established law; (5) Plaintiff’s Fourteenth 15 Amendment claim should be denied because Jacobsen’s act to protect Wilson was not arbitrary or 16 conscience shocking … Qualified Immunity 9 Qualified immunity “protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar 10 as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

McCaster v. United States

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 13, 2025

Orders 14 A temporary restraining order (TRO) is an extraordinary and temporary “fix” that the Court 15 may issue without notice to the adverse party if, in an affidavit or verified complaint, the movant 16 “clearly … of sovereign immunity, and sovereign 17 immunity bars his claim, the undersigned recommends dismissal of this claim without leave to 18 amend. 19

Macias v. City of Delano

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 27, 2022

“The threshold inquiry in a qualified immunity analysis is whether the plaintiff’s 2 allegations, if true, establish a constitutional violation.” Wilkins v. … Whether the Decedent’s Constitutional Right was Clearly Established 6 The court turns next to the second step of the qualified immunity analysis on summary 7 judgment, which asks whether the decedent’s right to be

Harris v. Henry Miller Reclamation District No. 2131

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 24, 2022

The doctrine of qualified 13 immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from such liability 14 “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … “When, as here, defendants assert qualified 8 immunity in a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), dismissal is not appropriate unless [a court] 9 can determine, based on the complaint itself, that qualified immunity

(PC) Candler v. Lebeck

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 5, 2019

on the basis of “qualified 8 immunity.” … “Government officials enjoy qualified immunity from civil damages unless their 9 conduct violates ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable 10 person would have known.’”

Taylor v. County of Calaveras

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 17, 2020

The 5 doctrine of qualified immunity shields individual officers “from liability for civil damages insofar 6 as their conduct [did] not violate clearly established ... constitutional rights of which a reasonable 7 person … of clearly 2 established law, the Court denies Defendants’ summary judgment motion with respect to 3 qualified immunity on Plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment unlawful entry claims. 4 2.

(PC) Taylor v. Teragawa

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 5, 2023

Further, defendant contends he is entitled to qualified immunity because the law was 5 not clearly established in February 2018 that prison staff cannot use reasonable force in 6 responding to an inmate’s suicide attempt … Accordingly, defendant is entitled to qualified immunity. 16 X.

(PC) Davis v. Phui

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 12, 2024

Qualified Immunity 27 A government official is entitled to qualified immunity under Section 1983 unless (1) the 28 official “violated a federal statutory or constitutional … Washington, 47 F.3d 839, 844 (9th Cir. 1998). 17 Here, Defendants assert they are entitled to qualified immunity because they did not 18 violate any particular infectious disease protocol and it was not clearly established

McDaniel v. Diaz

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 18, 2020

Opp’n 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 a … itself, that 12 qualified immunity applies.”

Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians v. United States

639 F. Supp. 165 · District Court, E.D. California · Apr 2, 1986

Finally, since three plaintiffs are Indian tribes or bands with governing bodies recognized by the Secretary, they also qualify to bring suit under section 1362. 6 The scope of section 1362 has been construed to be as broad … Defendants also contended that without the APA’s specific waiver, plaintiffs’ claims were barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity.

Sherman

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 17, 2025

that qualified immunity is an affirmative defense, and one 5 that does not require additional facts to be sufficiently plead. … Oct. 16 25, 2024) (denying motion to strike PLRA affirmative defense as conclusory, noting: “Like 17 qualified immunity, the PLRA is frequently litigated, well established, and easily understood”); 18 Schmitz v.

Maric v. Alvarado

District Court, E.D. California · Feb 27, 2020

Qualified Immunity 17 1. … As the Ninth Circuit held, the resolution of both the “clearly established” and 25 “reasonableness” inquiries in Defendants’ favor depend upon the

Nigel Albert Marin v. California Department of Rehabilitation

District Court, E.D. California · May 20, 2026

Consequently, in seeking a mandatory injunction, 6 plaintiffs must “establish that the law and facts clearly favor” their position. Garcia, 786 F.3d at 7 740 (emphasis in original). … This is because the only named defendant, 18 DOR, is an agency of the State of California and therefore is immune from a suit for damages 19 under § 1983. See N. Ins. Co. of N.Y. v.