Case law

Dawson

District Court, N.D. California · Oct 23, 2025

She is 9 also “a qualified individual with a disability (traumatic brain injury).” … 631, 636 (9th Cir. 2012) (cleaned up). 13 “[G]enerally, a single instance of unlawful conduct is insufficient to state a claim for municipal 14 liability,” but it may be sufficient “where fault and causation were clearly

Mendez v. Gearan

956 F. Supp. 1520 · District Court, N.D. California · Feb 13, 1997

Plaintiff asserts that the record, viewed in the light most favorable to the defendant, establishes that plaintiff fulfills the first and third definitions. a. … Otherwise Qualified The second requirement for an individual proceeding under the Rehabilitation Act is a showing that he/she is “otherwise qualified” 8 for the position sought.

Pilling v. Bay Area Rapid Transit

881 F. Supp. 2d 1152 · District Court, N.D. California · Jul 25, 2012

Finally, Plaintiff appears to question whether DOT regulations apply given that the Bike Station is not clearly a “transportation facility” as defined in 49 C.F.R. 37.3. Id. … Paratransit service is clearly governed by Part B; rules regarding membership requirements for a bike parking facility are not clearly governed, or "within the scope” of the Secretary's authority.

Washeleski

District Court, N.D. California · Dec 8, 2025

To establish a violation of Title II of the ADA, 9 Washeleski must allege that (1) he is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) he was excluded 10 from participation in or otherwise discriminated against with … Among 10 other elements, Washeleski must establish that he is likely to succeed on the merits.

Cobb v. United States

91 F. Supp. 717 · District Court, N.D. California · Jun 7, 1950

Although the United States’ rights to Okinawa have not been clearly defined, it is expected that our tenure there will be of long duration.” … The court said “In brief, though Congress was ready to lay aside a great portion of the sovereign’s ancient and unquestioned immunity from suit, it was unwilling to subject the United States to lia *720 bilities depending

Liu v. Terry

District Court, N.D. California · Jun 30, 2021

Immunity 5 In one sentence in their motion Defendants baldly allege that Plaintiff’s search and seizure 6 claim is barred by qualified immunity. … An officer is entitled to qualified immunity unless (1) the 7 facts that a plaintiff has alleged make out a violation of a constitutional right, and (2) the right was 8 “clearly” established at the time of the alleged

United States v. San Francisco Electrical Contractors Ass'n

57 F. Supp. 57 · District Court, N.D. California · Sep 5, 1944

We advert briefly to the immunity which attaches to certain activities of employers and employees, working separately or in concert. … But, clearly, each union was bargaining collectively with each contractor.

E. Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Trump

354 F. Supp. 3d 1094 · District Court, N.D. California · Dec 19, 2018

Even under the framework established in Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. … But Defendants have not shown that these provisions immunize the primary asylum eligibility portions of the Rule from judicial review.

Peace v. Wu

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 13, 2022

right, and (2) whether that right 24 was “clearly established” at the time of the alleged misconduct. … Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 202 (2001); see also 27 Pearson, 555 U.S. at 236 (overruling Saucier’s requirement that qualified immunity analysis 1 of the two prongs of the qualified immunity analysis should be addressed first

Gutierrez v. Ilchert

682 F. Supp. 467 · District Court, N.D. California · May 2, 1988

Again the District Director denied the request, reiterating that petitioner was “clearly ineligible” for amnesty. … De Gallardo clearly renders the District Director’s argument meritless.

Crowley v. Allen

52 F. Supp. 850 · District Court, N.D. California · Nov 17, 1943

Same: Burden of establishing •that rights are reciprocal. The burden shall be upon such nonresident aliens to establish the fact of existence of the reciprocal rights set forth in Section 259. … Justice Black clearly states that: “When the national government by treaty or statute has established rules and regulations touching the rights, privileges, obligations or burdens of aliens as such, the treaty or statute

Cator v. Herrgott & Wilson, Inc.

609 F. Supp. 12 · District Court, N.D. California · Jun 12, 1984

adherence to a consistent pattern of interpretation of pension plans is “significant evidence that the trustees have not acted arbitrarily,” and thus the fact that the Gordon pensioner was compelled to file proper forms to qualify … In summation, the Court finds that the Committee properly interpreted the provisions of the Plan by denying Cator’s claim that the May 31st valuation date figures reflected his “vested benefits,” which were thereafter immune

Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Am. Fin. Benefits Ctr.

324 F. Supp. 3d 1067 · District Court, N.D. California · Aug 8, 2018

As a result, consumers may be enrolled in programs for which they do not qualify. Id. ¶ 30 . … Such allegations clearly do not meet the Rule 9(b) standard." Mot. at 11.

United States v. Terry

39 F. 355 · District Court, N.D. California · May 24, 1889

The district attorney was clearly right if he merely informed the grand jurors that, as a general rule, the defendant had no right to produce witnesses in his defense, nor had they any right to hear them; in other words, … The grand jury is necessarily left to be the sole judges whether there is “reason to believe that other evidence not presented would qualify or explain away the charge.”

Salmon v. Pacific Lumber Co.

30 F. Supp. 2d 1231 · District Court, N.D. California · Dec 9, 1998

Environmental organizations therefore qualify as a “person” and may bring suits under the ESA in their own name. III. … Finally, an environmental organization such as EPIC or the Sierra Club may have standing to sue “in its own right ... to vindicate whatever rights and immunities the association itself may enjoy,” and in doing so, “may assert

Peterson v. United States of America

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 2, 2020

Peterson’s arguments in 2 Opposition instead focus on her time in solitary confinement; in any event, Jenkins is entitled to 3 qualified immunity because Peterson does not claim a violation of a clearly established … Jenkins MTD 17. 5 “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil 6 damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly

Gomez v. Garcia

District Court, N.D. California · Aug 19, 2024

immunity. … immunity argument.

S.A. v. Trump

363 F. Supp. 3d 1048 · District Court, N.D. California · Dec 10, 2018

establish that they qualified for resettlement under U.S. law, that is, by demonstrating that they had a well-founded fear of persecution based on race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or … "Where, as here, a case is at the pleading stage, the plaintiff must 'clearly allege facts demonstrating' each element." Id. (internal ellipsis omitted) (quoting Warth v.

LeMoon v. California Forensic Medical Group, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Dec 3, 2021

Qualified Immunity 19 The doctrine of qualified immunity “protects government officials from liability for 20 civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly … Qualified 23 immunity is proper unless a plaintiff can establish that an officer “committed a 24 constitutional violation” and an officer’s “specific conduct violated ‘clearly established’ 25 federal law.”

Pecover v. Electronics Arts Inc.

633 F. Supp. 2d 976 · District Court, N.D. California · Jun 5, 2009

The court qualified this statement because Twombly involved a claim that conduct parallel in nature violated section 2. … Recently, the Supreme Court extended this reasoning to a case involving a somewhat analogous safe harbor from liability: qualified immunity. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, — U.S.-, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949-51 , 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009).