Case law

Dickey

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 12, 2026

Police 5 detectives can investigate crimes, collect evidence, and recommend an arrest, and they enjoy only 6 qualified immunity. See id. at 273–74. … A police detective could have done the same thing 25 and would be entitled to qualified immunity at most. See id. at 639–40; KRL v. Moore, 384 F.3d 26 1105, 1111–12 (9th Cir. 2004) Milstein v.

(PC) Snowden v. Yule

District Court, E.D. California · Oct 31, 2023

Defendants also argue that they are 16 entitled to qualified immunity. … or constitutional right; and (2) whether 20 the right at issue was clearly established at the time of the incident.

No Casino in Plymouth v. Jewell

136 F. Supp. 3d 1166 · District Court, E.D. California · Sep 30, 2015

and 292.10 (“How does a tribe qualify as having been restored to Federal recognition?”) provide criteria by which the restored lands exception can be met. … The issue in Judge Karlton’s Order was the federal government’s motion for summary judgment on grounds that it had not waived its sovereign immunity from suit.

Maez v. Maez

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 8, 2022

Absolute and Qualified Immunity – Defendant Coronado 2 Additionally, it appears that Defendant Coronado, a social worker, may be entitled to 3 absolute or qualified immunity from suit. … “It has long been 18 established that judges are absolutely immune from liability for acts ‘done in the exercise of their 19 judicial functions.” Miller v.

(PC) Fregia v. Miranda

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 19, 2024

immunity. … Qualified Immunity 16 Defendant also asserts that the Court should grant summary judgment on the basis of 17 qualified immunity.

Nash-Perry v. City of Bakersfield

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 31, 2021

If a jury were to accept Plaintiffs’ version of the facts to be true, 15 Patino would not be entitled to qualified immunity “because it is a violation of clearly established law 16 for an officer to use deadly force against … Where such factual disputes 20 remain, qualified immunity is not appropriate.

Moon v. Rush

69 F. Supp. 3d 1035 · District Court, E.D. California · Dec 22, 2014

Habib responded in November 2011 that the Plan did not consider the DRO qualified. (Defs. SUF ¶ 247-249.) The Plan first established procedures for qualifying a DRO in November 2011. (PI. SUF ¶ 32.) III. DISCUSSION A. … Rush and Habib Rush and Habib argue they cannot be held liable for failing in 1995 “to properly establish written procedures to determine the qualified status of the QDRO and [and for failing to] inform Ms.

Johnson v. Shasta County

83 F. Supp. 3d 918 · District Court, E.D. California · Jan 6, 2015

“California ... has rejected the Monell rule and imposes liability on counties under the doctrine of respondeat superior for acts of county employees; it grants immunity to counties only where the public employee would also … be immune.”

Cisneros v. Instant Capital Funding Group, Inc.

263 F.R.D. 595 · District Court, E.D. California · Sep 18, 2009

“If the pleadings establish facts compelling a decision one way, that is as good as if depositions and other expensively obtained evidence on summary judgment establishes the identical facts.” Weisbuch v. … Trustee Corps’ alleged wrongs are subject to section 2924(d) immunity. This Court construes Ms.

Perez v. Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co.

161 F. Supp. 2d 1110 · District Court, E.D. California · Aug 24, 2001

In order to establish a “reasonable accommodation” claim, plaintiff must show that he (1) “suffers from a disability covered by FEHA,” and (2) is a qualified individual. Jensen v. … “For purposes of a section 12940, subdivision (k) claim, the plaintiff proves he or she is a qualified individual by establishing that he or she can perform the essential functions of the position to which reassignment is

(PC) Machado v. Bustamante

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 17, 2021

The initial inquiry in evaluating a claim of qualified immunity 6 is whether a plaintiff’s allegations, taken as true, establish that the defendant violated his 7 constitutional rights. See Saucier v. … Since the first inquiry is answered in the 10 affirmative, I must determine whether the right Young violated was clearly established. Id.

(PC) Sekona v. Francis

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 18, 2024

Qualified Immunity 23 Qualified immunity applies when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established 24 statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Officers are entitled to qualified immunity under Section 1983 unless 26 (1) the officers violate a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their 27 conduct was “clearly established at the

Gearhead Productions, Inc. v. Gearhead Outfitters, Inc.

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

The Parties’ mere designation 3 of Disclosure or Discovery Material as CONFIDENTIAL or HIGHLY 4 CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY does not—without the submission 5 of competent evidence by declaration, establishing … a claim of privilege or other protection, 28 the obligations of the Receiving Parties are those set forth in Federal Rule of Civil 2 may be established

(PS) Holmstrand v. Mercy Housing of California

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 5, 2025

20 tenant “may not be denied admission to, denied assistance under, terminated from participation 21 in, or evicted from the housing” because the tenant is a victim of domestic violence, if the tenant 22 “otherwise qualifies … Id. at § 12491(b)(3)(B)(ii). 3 If they “cannot establish eligibility,” the agency “shall provide the tenant or resident a reasonable 4 time ... to find new housing or to establish eligibility for housing under another

(PC) Maxwell v. Mitchell

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 22, 2021

Qualified Immunity 12 Government officials enjoy qualified immunity from civil damages unless their 13 conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … However, even if the plaintiff 8 has alleged a violation of a clearly established right, the government official is entitled to 9 qualified immunity if he could have “. . . reasonably but mistakenly believed that

Gerling Global Reinsurance Corp. of America v. Low

186 F. Supp. 2d 1099 · District Court, E.D. California · Oct 2, 2001

Plaintiffs have not established that HVIRA violates due process because it was enacted in excess of the state’s legislative jurisdiction. … Categorizing plaintiffs’ licenses as “privileges” bestowed by the state does not immunize their suspension from a due process challenge.

King v. City of Sacramento

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 26, 2022

Defendants argue they are entitled to qualified 26 immunity and therefore summary judgment. See Mot. at 13–16. 27 “In Hervey v. … Thus, in judicial deception cases in the Ninth Circuit, there is no independent 6 requirement that plaintiff show a defendant violated clearly established law: the “qualified 7 immunity analysis at the summary judgment

Sass v. California Board of Prison Terms

376 F. Supp. 2d 975 · District Court, E.D. California · Jun 15, 2005

Further, in subdivision (b), “shall” is qualified by the phrase “unless it determines”. … As a matter of clearly established federal law, the Supreme Court has regularly deferred to state court interpretations of state stat *982 utes.

Solares v. Diaz

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 12, 2021

Qualified Immunity 10 Qualified immunity protects “government officials . . . from liability for civil damages 11 insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … right and 15 (2) whether such right was clearly established at the time of defendant’s alleged misconduct.

United States v. Baird

865 F. Supp. 659 · District Court, E.D. California · Aug 31, 1994

Thus, section 2000a(b) is very explicit in limiting the types of establishments that may qualify as a place of public accommodation under the statute. … The court reaffirmed, however, that Congress clearly did not intend to cover “grocery type food stores.” Ibid.