Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
6,306 results
0.50s
(PC) Quintana v. Scharffenberg
District Court, E.D. California · Dec 17, 2019
immunity.” … (Id.). 18 Additionally, Plaintiff argues that Defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity 19 because “Dr.
Cited 0 timesUnknown739 F. Supp. 517 · District Court, E.D. California · Jun 7, 1990
Finding this practice inconsistent with clearly established Ninth Circuit precedent construing the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. section 1382a, this court invalidated that regulation and policy by its Orders dated August … Indeed, as one district court has recently noted, “a *524 position of the Secretary which is ‘contrary to clearly established circuit precedent’ obviously cannot have a reasonable basis in law.” Brown v.
Reversed on other grounds by Cervantez v. Sullivan, 963 F.2d 229 (1992)Cited 16 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. California · Nov 30, 2020
Qualified Immunity 4 Alternatively, Defendants argue they are entitled to qualified immunity since they did not 5 violate any clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … The doctrine of qualified immunity protects officials from civil liability if their conduct 7 “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable 8 person would have known.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Oct 17, 2023
Thus, 26 “[b]ecause no case law clearly established that every reasonable person would have known that 27 Sullivan’s alleged conduct was unconstitutional, Sullivan is entitled to qualified immunity.” 1 Defendant … Qualified Immunity 5 Defendant contends he is entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Feb 21, 2023
Defendant concludes that because case 7 law does not clearly establish “that every reasonable person would have known that Sullivan’s 8 alleged conduct was unconstitutional, Sullivan is entitled to qualified immunity. … (Id. at 9.) 13 Next, Plaintiff argues Sullivan is not entitled to qualified immunity.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jul 28, 2022
The qualified 28 immunity analysis has two prongs: (1) whether the official violated the plaintiff’s constitutional 1 rights; and (2) whether the right violated was clearly established at the time of the official’s … qualified immunity purposes.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Sep 20, 2023
Alternatively, defendants 20 argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. Id. at 31-33. 21 B. … “[S]ummary 20 judgment based on qualified immunity is improper if, under the plaintiff’s version of the facts, 21 and in light of the clearly established law, a reasonable officer could not have believed his 22 conduct
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jun 18, 2020
“The threshold inquiry in a qualified immunity analysis is whether the plaintiff's 10 allegations, if true, establish a constitutional violation.” Wilkins v. … Pearson, 555 U.S. at 231. 14 Therefore, here if plaintiff fails to establish the first step, the court need not address the second 15 step of the qualified immunity analysis. See id. 16 A.
Cited 0 timesUnknown(PC) Huckabee v. Medical Staff at CSATF
District Court, E.D. California · Feb 18, 2020
The defense of qualified immunity protects “government officials...from 7 liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or 8 constitutional rights of which a reasonable … A court considering a claim of qualified immunity must determine whether 10 the plaintiff has alleged the deprivation of an actual constitutional right and whether the right was 11 clearly established, such that it would
Cited 0 timesUnknownTillman v. ESA Management, LLC
District Court, E.D. California · Aug 21, 2020
DESIGNATING PROTECTED MATERIAL 2 Except as otherwise provided in this Order, or as otherwise stipulated or ordered, material 3 that qualifies for protection under this Order must be clearly … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 9 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party/Parties must clearly identify the protected portion(s) 10 (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins).
Cited 0 timesUnknownFree Spirit Organics, NAC v. San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors
District Court, E.D. California · Mar 25, 2022
Otherwise, to establish a violation of substantive due 27 process, a plaintiff must prove that the government’s action was clearly arbitrary and 28 unreasonable. Cnty. of Sacramento v. … App’x 428, 430 (9th Cir. 2002) (unpublished) (finding officers were 12 entitled to qualified immunity based on their reasonable interpretation of warrant and lack of 13 disputed factual issues).
Cited 0 timesUnknownUpjohn Co. v. Hygieia Biological Laboratories
151 F.R.D. 355 · District Court, E.D. California · Apr 28, 1993
The qualified nature of the trade secret privilege is expressly set forth in Cal.Evid. Code § 1060: “... … However, Upjohn has provided copies of the subpoenas which clearly set forth these provisions. See Exhibit 1 to Declaration of W. Patrick Bengtsson. .
Cited 7 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jan 27, 2025
DELANEY 22 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 23 24 | 4 95 mart1536.msj %6 > Defendants also argue they are entitled to summary judgment based on the qualified immunity … Because there is no genuine issue of material fact as to whether any defendant’s 27 || conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right, summary judgment based on qualified 3g immunity is also appropriate.
Cited 0 timesUnknown(PS) DeVan Daniel v. Clayborne
District Court, E.D. California · Aug 9, 2022
immunity if their conduct does not 1 violate some “clearly established” principle of law, and thus far plaintiff has yet to allege conduct 2 rising to the level of a constitutional violation that might overcome qualified … immunity.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Mar 31, 2021
Kitt’s Second Affirmative Defense: Immunity or Qualified Immunity 19 Plaintiff argues that, because Kitt has the burden of demonstrating qualified immunity 20 and is sued in his individual capacity, the Court should … strike Kitt’s second affirmative defense. 21 Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that must be pled in an answer.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Aug 4, 2020
Qualified Immunity 21 Qualified immunity protects government officers from “liability for civil damages insofar 22 as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Qualified immunity questions are to be resolved at the 25 “earliest possible stage in litigation” because qualified immunity is “an immunity from suit rather 26 than a mere defense to liability.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownXiong Xeng Moua v. City of Chico
324 F. Supp. 2d 1132 · District Court, E.D. California · Apr 9, 2004
immunity. … These allegations suffice to establish Article III standing. See Havens Realty Corp. v.
Cited 12 timesPublished(PC) Bowell v. California Department of Corrections
District Court, E.D. California · Nov 6, 2020
Plaintiff does not contest the Magistrate 27 Judge’s conclusion that the defendants violated no clearly established law. The court agrees with 28 and adopts that conclusion. … When, as is true here, officers “act[] in reliance on a duly-enacted 1 statute or ordinance,” they are “ordinarily entitled to qualified immunity.” Tshida v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Oct 11, 2024
When referring to the CM/ECF 28 system’s page numbers, they are preceded by “ECF p.” 1 qualified immunity. (ECF No. 84-1). … Qualified Immunity 18 Finally, Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because “[g]iven the 19 extreme rarity of spinal epidural abscesses and the tremendous
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. California · Jan 19, 2023
If the undisputed facts show no constitutional violation, or if the right was not clearly 15 established, the court should grant the official qualified immunity. Id. … Accordingly, the court 2 || must decline defendant’s request for qualified immunity. 3 IV.
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna