Case law

Harbert v. Priebe

466 F. Supp. 2d 1214 · District Court, N.D. California · Dec 18, 2006

Rather, it additionally provides a conditional or qualified privilege.” 168 Cal.App.3d 468, 482 , 214 Cal.Rptr. 254 (2 Dist.1985). … Furthermore, Plaintiffs have not shown that the requested material is “clearly relevant to an important issue in the case.” Shoen II, 48 F.3d at 416 .

Clement v. California Department of Corrections

220 F. Supp. 2d 1098 · District Court, N.D. California · Sep 9, 2002

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that they are immune from liability for any First Amendment violation because the Pelican Bay policy “did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … , then proceed to determine if the right was "clearly established").

United States v. 364.82 Acres of Land

38 F.R.D. 411 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 27, 1965

In addition, the Government seeks immunity for their appraisers from examination for the purpose of cross-examination at the trial. … In fact, if the parties have chosen their experts well, it is indeed likely that those experts will be qualified and will testify at the trial.

United States v. Tucor International, Inc.

35 F. Supp. 2d 1172 · District Court, N.D. California · Jun 15, 1998

Wells, 224 F.2d 577 , 578 n. 2 (9th Cir.1955) (writ of error coram nobis can only issue to aid jurisdiction of court in which conviction was had), cert. denied, 351 U.S. 911 , 76 S.Ct. 700 , 100 L.Ed. 1446 (1956). 5 To qualify … The Court will now review the legislative history in order to determine whether the interpretation urged by the government is compelled by clearly expressed legislative intent.

Moreno v. State of California

25 F. Supp. 2d 1060 · District Court, N.D. California · Nov 12, 1998

are entitled to qualified immunity, (5) Plaintiffs’ state law claim is barred because they failed to file a claim with the State Board of Control and (6) an injunction may not be issued under state law to prevent the execution … Moreover, it is not clear on the face of the *1064 complaint that Santillan and Hernandez are entitled to qualified immunity. Accordingly, the action will be dismissed without prejudice as to Santillan and Hernandez. C.

Adler

District Court, N.D. California · Apr 2, 2026

To determine if an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, the 18 Court considers whether (1) the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right, and (2) that right 19 was clearly established at the time of the … Cotton, 572 U.S. 650, 656 (2014). 24 Under the second prong of the qualified immunity inquiry, “[a]n officer cannot be said to 25 have violated a clearly established right unless the right’s contours were sufficiently

Paciulan v. George

38 F. Supp. 2d 1128 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 3, 1999

Finally, plaintiffs argue that a number of recent developments establish that Rule 983 is irrational and arbitrary. … Friedman, “Piper establishes that a nonresident who takes and passes an examination prescribed by the State, and who is otherwise qualified for the practice of law, has an interest in practicing law that is protected by the

Californians for Disability Rights, Inc. v. California Department of Transportation

249 F.R.D. 334 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 13, 2008

“Judgment on the pleadings is proper when the moving party clearly establishes on the face of the pleadings that no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” … By citing the dissenting opinions in two Ninth Circuit decisions as authority, 4 Cal-trans indirectly confirms that the only way this Court might embrace its reasoning would be to ignore clearly established Ninth Circuit

Blair v. Shanahan

775 F. Supp. 1315 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 8, 1991

Accordingly, the Arresting Officers are entitled to qualified immunity against any § 1983 claims based on violations of Blair’s First and Fourteenth Amendment rights committed while enforcing § 647(c). B. … Defendants’ motion for summary judgment as to the qualified immunity of the Arresting Officers for any violations of Blair’s First Amendment rights is granted. 6.

Brooks

District Court, N.D. California · Jul 28, 2026

was clearly established at the time.’” … In the context of 17 prison, the prohibition against retaliatory punishment is clearly established law for qualified 18 immunity purposes. See Chavez v.

Doe v. Liu Qi

349 F. Supp. 2d 1258 · District Court, N.D. California · Dec 8, 2004

It is for similar reasons — the concern of interfering with the administration of govern *1302 ment — that individual public officials are afforded qualified immunity from suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . See Harlow v. … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 806 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982) (purpose of qualified immunity is to protect public officials from "undue interference with their duties and from potentially disabling threats of liability

City of San Bruno v. Federal Emergency Management Agency

181 F. Supp. 2d 1010 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 4, 2001

This is the only language under which the Hillside could potentially qualify for funding, and San Bruno does not argue that the Hillside is otherwise eligible. … Defendant contends that it is immune from suit under the provisions of the Stafford Act.

Winding Creek Solar LLC v. California Public Utilities Commission

15 F. Supp. 3d 965 · District Court, N.D. California · Feb 10, 2014

With respect to the rates for purchases by electric utilities from a qualifying small power production facility, PURPA requires FERC to promulgate rules establishing that such rates “shall be just and reasonable to the electric … The Re-MAT decisions establish a two-step process to determine the rate at which a utility may offer to purchase power from a qualified small producer.

PUGA

District Court, N.D. California · Dec 12, 2025

Clearly Established 20 The Court begins with prong two of the qualified immunity analysis and considers whether 21 the right was clearly established at the time of the allegedly … Clearly Established 17 The Court begins with prong two of the qualified immunity analysis and considers whether 18 it was clearly established at the time that children may not be

Kemp

District Court, N.D. California · Aug 20, 2026

See WMX Technologies, 104 F.3d 1 Qualified immunity protects “government officials . . . from liability for civil damages insofar as 2 their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … A court considering a claim of qualified immunity 11 must determine whether the plaintiff has alleged the deprivation of an actual constitutional right 12 and whether such right was clearly established such that it

Independent Housing Services v. Fillmore Center Associates

840 F. Supp. 1328 · District Court, N.D. California · Dec 28, 1993

That case is clearly distinguishable. … The court held the grant of immunity under § 818.6 to be absolute.

Merrifield v. Lockyer

388 F. Supp. 2d 1051 · District Court, N.D. California · Aug 1, 2005

The Code establishes a licensing scheme with three “branches.” Id. § 8560(a). … Privileges and Immunities Clause Claim As noted, Plaintiffs also contend that the structural pest licensing scheme infringes their rights under the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Daniels

District Court, N.D. California · May 27, 2026

clearly established statutory or 1 U.S. 800, 818 (1982). … However, the Circuit also held that the police officer was entitled 13 || to qualified immunity because the law that existed in 2020, when the incident occurred, did not 14 || clearly establish that his actions

Barbaccia v. County of Santa Clara

451 F. Supp. 260 · District Court, N.D. California · May 10, 1978

This court has previously found the appropriate scope of protection for public officials making discretionary zoning decisions in the qualified immunity of Wood v. … Qualified immunity exonerates actions taken in good faith and upon a reasonable belief, questions of fact which preclude a 12(b)(6) dismissal.

Mullin

District Court, N.D. California · Feb 19, 2026

Qualified Immunity 27 Defendants also assert that they are entitled to the defense of qualified immunity. … A court considering a claim of qualified immunity must 11 determine whether the plaintiff has alleged the deprivation of an actual constitutional right and 12 whether such right was clearly established such that it