Case law

Marquez Rivas v. Kern County Hospital Authority

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 22, 2025

Supp. 2d at 22 1269 (holding that a physician is a contractor under § 233(g)(1)(A) “only if he or she has entered into 23 a contract with a qualified entity”); Perez-Rodriguez v. … Therefore, the Court finds it unnecessary to apply 15 the “control” test established in Logue and Orleans.

Rocky Mountain Farmers Union v. Goldstene

843 F. Supp. 2d 1042 · District Court, E.D. California · Dec 29, 2011

Defendants moved to dismiss the complaints arguing, inter alia, that Section 211(c)(4)(B) immunizes them from (1) scrutiny under the Commerce Clause and (2) preemption by Section 211(o). … In their complaints, plaintiffs clearly allege that California’s LCFS conflicts with Section 211(o) of the Clean Air Act.

(PS) Rhee v. Alvarez

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 5, 2022

Government officials enjoy qualified immunity from civil 25 damages unless their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of 26 which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … established, Defendants Moya, Lavid, and Hilziger are entitled to qualified immunity.

Solano Garbage Co. v. Cheney

779 F. Supp. 477 · District Court, E.D. California · Nov 14, 1991

Defendants also argue that the government has not waived sovereign immunity over plaintiffs claims. … The government contends that neither RCRA nor the APA waive sovereign immunity for this claim.

In Defense of Animals v. United States Department of the Interior

909 F. Supp. 2d 1178 · District Court, E.D. California · Nov 15, 2012

Those numbers are consistent with the established AMLs. … In that sense, the BLM’s actions are clearly designed to minimize intervention in the long run.

(PC) Brooks v. Newsom

District Court, E.D. California · Oct 12, 2023

(Id.) 18 Plaintiff further states that he is a “qualified individual with a disability.” … An equal protection claim may be established by showing that defendants 12 intentionally discriminated against plaintiff based on his membership in a protected class, 13 Hartmann, 707 F.3d at 1123, or that similarly situated

Kimberly Y. Mims, et al. v. California Legislative Black Caucus, et al.

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 9, 2025

In 2 reviewing a complaint under this standard, the court accepts as true the factual 3 allegations contained in the complaint, unless they are clearly baseless or fanciful, and 4 construes those allegations in the … Moreover, the Complaint also fails to establish diversity jurisdiction. Although 6 Plaintiffs meet the amount in controversy, Plaintiffs do not establish complete diversity of 7 citizenship.

(PC) Martinez v. Secretary of California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

District Court, E.D. California · Feb 21, 2025

The court observed 5 the CDCR was the only defendant named in the caption but found the CDCR had immunity under 6 the Eleventh Amendment. (Id., citing, e.g., Idaho v. … This also 14 qualifies as a strike under Section 1915(g).

Estate of F.R Jr. v. County of Yuba

District Court, E.D. California · May 30, 2025

Qualified Immunity 18 Even if plaintiffs had established genuine disputes of 19 material fact precluding summary judgment on the constitutional 20 claims … , the defendant officers would still be entitled to 21 qualified immunity because they did not violate clearly 22 established law.

Calvin Rush and Jayme Rush v. City of Vallejo, et al.

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 9, 2025

City Defendants further argue 15 Officer Horton’s conduct is entitled to qualified immunity because even if he did engage in 16 excessive force, it was not clearly established at the time of the incident that the act … City 27 Defendants argue Plaintiffs’ failure to put forward authority showing Officer Horton violated a 28 clearly established constitutional right entitles him to qualified immunity.

Sacramento Nonprofit Collective v. Holder

855 F. Supp. 2d 1100 · District Court, E.D. California · Feb 28, 2012

right to privately use marijuana for medical purposes — and no court has ever found one — the recognition of such a right would not equate to the right of access to marijuana through the Plaintiff dispensary or the right to immunity … Since judicial estoppel does not apply unless “a party’s later position [is] ‘clearly inconsistent’ with its earlier position,” and the Ogden Memo does not contain a promise not to enforce the CSA, *1112 Defendants’ enforcement

United States v. Luong

255 F. Supp. 2d 1123 · District Court, E.D. California · Feb 13, 2003

Here, Luong is clearly unable to make out a prima facie equal protection violation. … Accordingly, Luong has failed to establish a prima facie equal protection violation.

Adobe Lumber, Inc. v. Hellman

658 F. Supp. 2d 1188 · District Court, E.D. California · Sep 8, 2009

demonstrates Congress aimed to abrogate sovereign immunity for the states.” … At oral argument, the City qualified its concession by asserting that, although it owned and operated the sewer, it does not meet the definition of an owner or operator under CERCLA.

Fossum v. Lamm

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

Idaho State Bd. of Med., 363 F.3d 916, 922 (9th Cir. 2004). 26 “Few doctrines were more solidly established at common law than the immunity of judges from 27 liability for damages for acts committed within their judicial … Saxner, 474 U.S. 193 (1985)). 3 Judicial immunity “is an immunity from suit, not just from the ultimate assessment of damages.” 4 Mireles v.

Terrence Brewer v. California State Bar, et al.

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 11, 2026

In a facial challenge, the 18 moving party asserts that the allegations in the complaint are “insufficient on their face” to 19 establish federal jurisdiction. Id. … To state a Title II claim, plaintiff must allege that: 27 “(1) he is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) he was either excluded from participation in 28 or denied the benefits of a public entity’s services,

Jasso

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 18, 2025

Qualified Immunity 5 In the alternative, Defendant asserts that she is entitled to qualified immunity in this case 6 because no official in her position would believe … The plaintiff bears the burden 24 of establishing that the right alleged was clearly established. Moran v.

United States v. Pool

645 F. Supp. 2d 903 · District Court, E.D. California · May 27, 2009

Defendant’s argument that no data sequestration system is immune from abuse is no reason to disallow DNA identification sampling. … The scope of qualifying offenses was increased in 2001 under the USA Patriot Act, and extended to any felony pursuant to the Justice for All Act of 2004.

Goins v. County of Merced

185 F. Supp. 3d 1224 · District Court, E.D. California · May 5, 2016

However, defendants have clearly not asserted either claim or issue preclusion in moving for summary judgment in their favor. … Moreover, whether plaintiffs may claim pecuniary damages of any kind clearly remains in dispute. .

McCoy v. Green

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 18, 2025

2 “The immunity of a prosecutor is based upon the same purpose that underlies the immunity 3 of judges and grand jurors acting within the scope of their duties: to protect the judicial process.” 4 Milstein v. … But the alternative of 15 qualifying a prosecutor's immunity would disserve the broader public interest.”

(PC) Reid v. Nash

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 1, 2024

violated clearly established law. 21 Plaintiff filed an opposition to Defendant’s motion. … Whether Defendant Green is Entitled to Qualified Immunity 12 Finally, Defendant Green argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity because