Case law

Clay v. Permanente Medical Group, Inc.

540 F. Supp. 2d 1101 · District Court, N.D. California · Dec 14, 2007

The Conference Report accompanying the MMA clearly demonstrates that, in amending 42 U.S.C. 1395w-26, Congress intended to broaden the preemptive effects of the Medicare statutory regime, and that it intended to apply the … See Reply at 1 ("Defendants acknowledge that the McCarran-Ferguson Act immunizes section 1363.1, Calif.

Intermedics, Inc. v. Ventritex, Inc.

804 F. Supp. 35 · District Court, N.D. California · Sep 2, 1992

This court clearly issued no order, written or oral, that in any way purported to reformulate defendants’ motion as filed. … Kovacs is not qualified to offer the opinions in question. Defendants also argue that the bases for the opinions in issue here by Dr.

Norton v. LVNV Funding, LLC

District Court, N.D. California · May 19, 2020

On July 24, 2009, the defendants 8 moved to amend their answer to add a qualified immunity defense. … In finding that allowing amendment comported with the underlying 11 purpose of Rule 16(b), the court noted that “asserting the qualified immunity defense at this point in the litigation has created no meaningful cases

Tanforan Co. v. United States

313 F. Supp. 796 · District Court, N.D. California · May 20, 1970

In order to qualify for the recognition of loss from physical abandonment, the intent of the taxpayer must be irrevocably to discard the asset so that it will be neither used again by him nor retrieved by him for sale, exchange … In summary, since the evidence clearly establishes that the useful life of the racetrack assets ended on termination of racing at Tanforan, and not as a result of any sale or decision to sell to Sunset, the sale of the land

Ferry v. De Longhi America Inc.

276 F. Supp. 3d 940 · District Court, N.D. California · Aug 16, 2017

Ferry did not qualify as Mr. Sapp’s spouse, domestic partner, or putative spouse, and thus, lacks standing to bring a wrongful death claim. A. … May 12, 2016) (finding the putative spouse doctrine inapplicable where “the record clearly established] that [the alleged spouses] knew they were not legally married ....”) (emphasis in original). Although Mr.

Burke v. Pitney Bowes Inc. Long Term Disability Plan

640 F. Supp. 2d 1160 · District Court, N.D. California · Jul 1, 2009

The Plan notified Burke by letter dated November 3, 2003, that Burke no longer qualified for LTD benefits. … Barry are clearly devoid of legitimacy. AR at 130. Zwerin described Barry’s conclusions as “preposterous.” AR at 131.

United States v. City and County of San Francisco

699 F. Supp. 762 · District Court, N.D. California · Aug 31, 1988

The Applications of Plaintiff-inter-venors Plaintiff-intervenors are quite clearly prevailing parties. … Although the standard and quantum of evidence required to establish a reasonable hourly rate has not been established in this circuit, see note 2, supra, the Hunt declaration provides the court with a sufficient level of

Autodesk, Inc. v. Dassault Systèmes Solidworks Corp.

685 F. Supp. 2d 1001 · District Court, N.D. California · Dec 8, 2009

Moreover, defendant also asserts that regardless of the Sleekcraft analysis, plaintiffs claim fails because its uses qualify as nominative fair use. … Therefore, statement three is immune from false advertising liability and need not be addressed in that analysis.

Rising Tide I, LLC v. Fitzsimmons

District Court, N.D. California · Nov 22, 2019

Bergeson argues that while Defendants are 23 clearly relying on Latham’s legal advice for their advice of counsel defense, it’s not quite clear 24 that they are relying on Bergeson’s advice. … As before, the Trustee’s statement that he is not waiving any privilege he may have does not establish the existence of the privilege.

Prado v. Sullivan

District Court, N.D. California · Dec 22, 2023

immunity. … immunity.”

Hangarter v. Paul Revere Life Insurance

236 F. Supp. 2d 1069 · District Court, N.D. California · Nov 12, 2002

If, in the course of trial, a nexus is established between these documents and Plaintiffs claim, the court will re-consider the issue.” … Section 790.09 expressly provides that an administrative action does not immunize a defendant from either civil or criminal liability.

Redd-Oyedele v. Santa Clara County Office of Education

District Court, N.D. California · Aug 14, 2020

. ¶ 34(v). 2 Plaintiff claims that the “Oral Board” put in place by Defendant Dewan discriminated against her 3 by deeming her not qualified and eliminating her from the eligibility list for the Assistant Director … As a result, Defendant Dewan is also entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity. 2 Because both Defendants are immune under the Eleventh Amendment from Plaintiff’s 3 second cause of action for negligent infliction

Fidelity Financial Corp. v. Federal Home Loan Bank

589 F. Supp. 885 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 3, 1983

But the case law is clear that merely “incidental”, or secondary, beneficiaries of a statute do not qualify under the Cort “especial beneficiary” standard. 9 Fidelity urges that this Court permit it a private right of action … Clearly, any acts taken by the directors individually, and as a body, were taken in their official capacity and pursuant to their duties to the Board.

Andrews v. Martinez

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 27, 2019

; (3) Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the Eleventh 7 Amendment and Heck’s2 favorable-termination rule; and (4) Defendants are entitled to qualified 8 immunity. … to be heard and to challenge the 9 evidence against him was clearly violated by experts.”

Jackson v. East Bay Hospital

980 F. Supp. 1341 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 6, 1997

Judgment On The Pleadings A motion for 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 … Plaintiff alleges that those false representations were made in order to qualify for payments under the federal Medicare Program. Id. at ¶ 38.

Rubio v. Allison

District Court, N.D. California · Jul 26, 2021

Furthermore, supervisor defendants are entitled to qualified immunity where the 13 allegations against them are simply “bald” or “conclusory” because such allegations do not 14 “plausibly” establish the supervisors’ … Does not name any Defendant who did not act but is linked solely in his or 11 her respondent superior capacity or against whom Plaintiff cannot allege facts that would establish 12 either supervisorial or municipal

Ro Ane v. Mathews

476 F. Supp. 1089 · District Court, N.D. California · May 16, 1977

Section 205(g)’s consent to suit against the Secretary constitutes a limited waiver of sovereign immunity and must be strictly construed. E.g., Zeller v. Folsom, 150 F.Supp. 615, 617 (N.D.N.Y.1956). … Clearly, the basis for differentiating between the two classes of school district employees is that, although plaintiffs have an established relationship with the SFRS coverage, group, other members have no such connection

In Re Secure Computing Corp. Securities Litigation

184 F. Supp. 2d 980 · District Court, N.D. California · Aug 21, 2001

The Court found in its June 14, 2000 Order granting dismissal of Plaintiffs’ Corrected Consolidated Complaint (CCC) that for purposes of pleading all six individual Defendants qualified as controlling persons and that Plaintiffs … the FAC fails to allege specific facts showing Defendants’ liability for third-party statements; (4) the FAC fails to provide sufficient support for allegations made on information and belief; (5) certain statements are immune

Reyes v. Premier Home Funding, Inc.

640 F. Supp. 2d 1147 · District Court, N.D. California · Jun 17, 2009

This presumption can be reversed only if the law can clearly be shown to fit within the confines of paragraph (c). For these purposes, paragraph (c) is intended to be interpreted narrowly. … Notably absent from Plaintiffs Complaint is any allegation that he attempted to tender, or are capable of tendering, the value of the property pursuant to the rescission framework established by TILA.

Newton v. American Debt Services, Inc.

854 F. Supp. 2d 712 · District Court, N.D. California · Feb 22, 2012

Plaintiff filled out the Application, establishing a “Special Purpose Account” with Defendant Rocky Mountain Bank & Trust (“RMBT”). FAC ¶ 37. … It places a premium with dis-positive effect upon the location of the objectionable clause — whether they are written within the arbitration paragraph or the paragraph preceding it — even though the arbitration clause clearly