Case law

Lee v. Natomas Unified School District

93 F. Supp. 3d 1160 · District Court, E.D. California · Feb 27, 2015

Pardi v. Kaiser Foundation Hosp., 389 F.3d 840, 849 (9th Cir.2004); Alex G. v. Board of Trustees, 387 F.Supp.2d 1119, 1128 (E.D.Cal.2005). … Miller, 797 F.2d at 733 citing United States Postal Service Board of Governors v.

Allen v. Woodford

544 F. Supp. 2d 1074 · District Court, E.D. California · Apr 4, 2008

See Allen v. … The Board cites Kennecott Copper Corp. v.

Saini v. U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services

553 F. Supp. 2d 1170 · District Court, E.D. California · Mar 27, 2008

Fu v. Gonzales, 2007 WL 1742376 at *5, citing Yu v. Brown, 36 F.Supp.2d 922, 933-34 (D.N.M.1999). … Liang v. Attorney General, 2007 WL 3225441 at *5, citing Yu v. Brown, 36 F.Supp.2d at 932 .

(PC) Allen v. Calvendra

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 6, 2024

See Ivey v. 9 Board of Regents, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982). 10 III. DISCUSSION 11 A. … Brown, No. 16-CV-84 JLS (BLM), 2018 7 WL 1905459, at *6 (S.D. Cal.

United States v. Godfrey

112 F. Supp. 3d 1097 · District Court, E.D. California · Jun 4, 2015

Quality Control Board in Rancho Cordova. RT1 at 1-161. Huggins was accepted by the Court as an expert witness. RT1 at 1-163. … See Phillips v.

Duarte Nursery, Inc. v. United States Army Corps of Engineers

17 F. Supp. 3d 1013 · District Court, E.D. California · Apr 23, 2014

Ass’n v. … The Board argues that plaintiffs seek retrospective relief, not prospective relief, and therefore the claim is barred by Idaho v.

City of Merced v. Fields

997 F. Supp. 1326 · District Court, E.D. California · Mar 12, 1998

See United Technologies Corp. v. Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc., 33 F.3d 96, 103 (1st Cir.1994). … (R & M) v. Browning-Ferris, Inc., 919 F.Supp. 1523 (N.D.Okl.1996), rev’d in pertinent part, 124 F.3d 1187 (10th Cir.1997).

Briggs v. Fenstermaker

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 10, 2023

Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. 11 Servs., 436 U.S. 658, 690–91 (1978); see also Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs v. Brown (Brown), 520 U.S. 12 397, 403 (1997). … See Brown at 403. 14 As entities, Defendants CRMC and the Board may only be sued under a Monell theory of 15 liability.

(PS) Rossington v. Mountain Circle Family Service, Inc.

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

15 Termination in Violation of the Brown Act. … Plaintiffs assert the Board meeting on August 4, 2021, was 2 “unauthorized, illegal, and in violation of the Brown Act, where [the] . . .

Zurich American Insurance v. General Motors Corp.

242 F. Supp. 2d 736 · District Court, E.D. California · Jan 30, 2003

See Jones v. … In Vasquez v.

Board of Trustees of IBEW Local 100 Pension Trust Fund v. Cole

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 10, 2021

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 BOARD … See 28 Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962). 1 II. Fed. R. Civ.

Goree

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 30, 2026

He states he refuses “to have [his] 12 board prep and mental treatment plan disrupted when [he] was the one assaulted on camera.” … Wilkerson v.

(PC) Loveless v. Parole Authorities of the California Board of Parole Hearings

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 29, 2021

LOVELESS, No. 2:21-CV-0430-WBS-DMC-P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. … See 9 | Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991), 10 11 | Dated: September 29, 2021 Ssvcqo_ 12 DENNIS M.

(PS) Olson v. Slote

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 25, 2020

Corp. v. … Balistreri v.

A Woman's Friend Pregnancy Resource Clinic v. Harris

153 F. Supp. 3d 1168 · District Court, E.D. California · Dec 21, 2015

Here, the court first finds the Act regulates what is-best characterized as professional speech, and the speech lands at the midpoint of the continuum described in Pickup v. Brown. … The court next considers how plaintiffs’ professional speech should be categorized under Pickup v. Brown. b) Pickup Continuum In Pickup v.

(PC) Loveless v. Parole Authorities of the California Board of Parole Hearings

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 4, 2021

See Heck v. … Wilkinson v.

(HC) (DP) Berryman v. Wong

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 29, 2024

See United States v. 9 Herrera, No. CR 08-0730 WHA, 2010 WL 5060608, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 6, 2010) (citing 10 United States v. … .”); see also United States v. Brown, 785 13 F.3d 1337, 1343 (9th Cir. 2015) (citing U.S. v.

Farmco Stores, Inc. v. Newmark

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

Board of Trade of San Francisco, 119 Cal.App. 2d 738, 741-743 , 260 P.2d 205, 207, 208 (1953): “Intentional and unjustifiable interference with contractual relations is actionable in California * * Speegle v. … (The language in Masoni v. Board of Trade of San Francisco, supra, was dictum and the court may choose not to follow it.) None of these possible defenses would involve any question of federal law.

Ogonowski

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 16, 2026

See 15 Ivey v. Board of Regents, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982). … See Bd. of County Comm’rs v. Brown, 520 U.S. 26 397, 403 (1997). Thus, municipal liability must rest on the actions of the municipality, and not of 27 the actions of its employees or officers. See id.

Alpha Land Co. v. Little

238 F.R.D. 497 · District Court, E.D. California · Sep 27, 2006

Rowland v. … Property”), which is located at 23009 Avenue 320, Lemon Cove, Tulare County, California 93244, and is more particularly described as follows: LOTS 8, 9, 10, 11, 13 AND 14 OF LINDCOVE REALTY COMPANY’S SUBDIVISION OF THE BROWN