Case law

Winnemem Wintu Tribe v. United States Department of the Interior

725 F. Supp. 2d 1119 · District Court, E.D. California · Jul 16, 2010

Sovereign Immunity Defendants further assert that the court has no subject matter jurisdiction because there is no waiver of sovereign immunity for claims brought under the ARPA, NHPA, NEPA, AIRFA, and NAGPRA. … Specifically, plaintiffs do not clearly make allegations against any agency other than the USFS. (Agency Defs.’ Mot. at 19.)

(PC) Penn v. Warden of Kern Valley State Prison

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 26, 2024

Aug. 22, 9 | 2022). 10 Here, the Court disagrees with Plaintiff's contention that Defendant raised the defense of 11 | qualified immunity for the first time in his Reply. … Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment 12 || asserts, inter alia, “[e]ven if the evidence established a First Amendment violation, Lucas 1s 13 | protected by qualified immunity” and notes, “‘a reasonable Appeals Coordinator

McClellan Ecological Seepage Situation v. Cheney

763 F. Supp. 431 · District Court, E.D. California · Aug 31, 1989

RCRA clearly establishes different scopes for these two different types of regulatory activities. The permitting program and the facility management standards in 40 C.F.R. … Allen & Associates, 389 F.Supp. 415, 416 (M.D.Ala.1975) (the Declaratory Judgment Act “provides no waiver of sovereign immunity”).

(PC) Franks v. Giddings

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

“Government officials enjoy qualified immunity from civil damages unless 7 their conduct violates ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable 8 person would have known.’” … a statutory or constitutional right; 12 and (2) whether the right at issue was clearly established at the time of the incident.

(PC) Leon v. Weiss

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 21, 2023

move to dismiss on the grounds that they are entitled to qualified immunity. 5 Determining whether officials receive qualified immunity involves two inquiries: (1) 6 whether, “taken in the light most favorable to … Defendants also 17 argue that it is not clearly established that their conduct violated the Constitution. 18 Because defendants’ motion to dismiss is granted with leave to amend, defendants’ 19 argument for qualified

Berg v. California Horse Racing Board

419 F. Supp. 2d 1219 · District Court, E.D. California · Mar 2, 2006

See Coghlan, 413 F.3d at 1095 (“Direct evidence typically consists of clearly sexist, racist, or similarly discriminatory statements or actions by the employer.”); Godwin v. … “To have a property interest in a benefit, a person clearly must have more than an abstract need or desire for it ... [and] more than a unilateral expectation of it ...

(PC) Peralta v. Swetalla

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

Prison officials implementing policies are entitled to 15 qualified immunity if, in the light of the clearly established law at the time, a reasonable official 16 could have believed that the conduct was lawful.” … For these reasons as well, Defendant Cano is entitled to qualified 25 immunity.”

(PC) Leen v. Montejo

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 25, 2024

a disputed issue of 3 material fact precluding the granting of summary judgment as to plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment 4 claim on the merits or on qualified immunity grounds. … In addition, defendant suggests that the magistrate judge’s asserted 12 failure to adequately consider such evidence also somehow called into question the denial of 13 summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds.

County of Inyo v. Department of the Interior

873 F. Supp. 2d 1232 · District Court, E.D. California · Jun 6, 2012

In the endeavor to establish the existence of a factual dispute, the opposing party need not establish a material issue of fact conclusively in its favor. … “R.S. 2477 as ‘as a present grant which takes effect as soon as it is accepted by the State,’ and acceptance requires only ‘some positive act on the part of the state, clearly manifesting an intention to accept.’

(PC) Martin v. Petras

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 6, 2021

Qualified 4 immunity protects § 1983 defendants from liability for civil damages so long as their conduct 5 does not violate clearly established constitutional or statutory rights of which a reasonable person 6 would … clearly established.

(PC) Price v. Iqbal

District Court, E.D. California · May 2, 2023

Affirmative Defense: Qualified Immunity 2 Lastly, defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity 3 || shields officials from civil liability if their conduct “‘does not violate clearly established statutory 4 | or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’”

(PC) Washington v. Gamboa

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 19, 2019

Qualified Immunity 21 Finally, Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Defendants’ 23 qualified immunity argument is based on Defendants’ version of the facts, which is contested. 24 It was clearly established at the time of this alleged conduct that the confiscation and 25 destruction

United States v. Iron Mountain Mines, Inc.

812 F. Supp. 1528 · District Court, E.D. California · Jan 20, 1993

The United States notes that a recoupment claim does not require waiver of sovereign immunity. … To the extent that the defenses seek setoff, they will be stricken because IMMI/Arman state that they are satisfied with only the recoupment claim and because IMMI/Arman have established no waiver of sovereign immunity.

(PS) Avila v. McMahon

District Court, E.D. California · Oct 16, 2020

Defendant is Entitled to Qualified Immunity and Summary Judgment on the Merits 9 Defendant asserts that he is protected from all 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims by the doctrine of 10 qualified immunity. … Government officials are immune “from 13 liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or 14 constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

Nigel Albert Marin v. California Department of Rehabilitation

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 6, 2026

TRO request, explaining as follows: 2 Plaintiff’s motion must be denied because the Court is unable to find likelihood of success on the merits, let alone that “the law and 3 facts clearly … Chandler, 303 F.3d 1039, 1052 (9th Cir. 2002) (to establish Rehabilitation Act violation a plaintiff must show, among 21 other things, that he was “denied the benefit or services solely by

Depaoli v. Carlton

878 F. Supp. 1351 · District Court, E.D. California · Jan 27, 1995

The burden then shifts to the opposing party to present evidence establishing a genuine issue of material fact. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. … And any arguments by defendant Carlton that may have persuaded the court to rule that DePaoli not be compensated with county funds clearly fall within the absolute immunity afforded prosecutors. See Buckley v.

(PC) Fearence v. CDCR

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 19, 2025

Chandler, 303 F.3d 1039, 1052 (9th Cir. 2002) (“To establish a violation of 24 Title II of the ADA, a plaintiff must show that (1) [ ]he is a qualified individual with a disability; 25 (2) [ ]he was excluded from participation … [was] entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity.”). 17 C.

United States Satellite Broadcasting Co. v. Lynch

41 F. Supp. 2d 1113 · District Court, E.D. California · Mar 12, 1999

On the issue of Eleventh Amendment immunity, this case cannot be distinguished from Capitol Industries-EMI. … Clearly, the Commission does not directly spend all of the revenues raised by the Boxing Act tax, because it deposits those revenues in the state general fund.

US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Placer ARC

114 F. Supp. 3d 1048 · District Court, E.D. California · Jul 13, 2015

Plaintiff’s Claim To establish a prima facie case of discrimination.under the ADA, a plaintiff “must show that she: (1) is disabled; (2) is qualified; and (3)..3uffered an adverse employment action because of her disability … to her performance, not her qualified status.

(PC) Thompson v. Gomez

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 23, 2022

(ECF No. 84-1 at 12.) 9 Qualified immunity “protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar 10 as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 236 (2009). 27 “[S]ummary judgment based on qualified immunity is improper if, under the plaintiff’s 28 version of the facts, and in light of the clearly established