Case law

Hernandez Ex Rel. Telles-Hernandez v. United States

665 F. Supp. 2d 1064 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 16, 2009

AMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1 SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG, District Judge. FINDINGS OF FACT 2 A. Prenatal Course Before Rupture of Membranes 1. … Brown v. Tri-Union Seafoods, LLC, 171 Cal.App.4th 1549, 1567 , 90 Cal.Rptr.3d 644 (2009) (internal quotations and citations omitted). 7.

Grigsby v. CMI Corp.

590 F. Supp. 826 · District Court, N.D. California · Jul 9, 1984

In October 1980, the CMI board decided to liquidate CMIFS, and entered into negotiations with plaintiffs. … Gaines v. Haughton, 645 F.2d 761 , 777 n. 24 (9th Cir.1981). See also Reiss v.

Knutson v. Daily Review, Inc.

468 F. Supp. 226 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 21, 1979

V., Inc. v. GTE Sylvania, Inc., 433 U.S. 36 , 53 n.21, 97 S.Ct. 2549 , 53 L.Ed.2d 568 (1977); Chicago Board of Trade v. … See Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294, 320 , 82 S.Ct. 1502 , 8 L.Ed.2d 510 (1962) (antitrust laws were enacted for the protection of competition, not competitors); cf.

Behne v. Microtouch Systems, Inc.

58 F. Supp. 2d 1096 · District Court, N.D. California · Jul 15, 1999

McNutt v. Board of Trustees, 141 F.3d 706, 709 (7th Cir.1998); Tanca v. Nordberg, 98 F.3d 680, 684 (1st Cir.1996) cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1119 , 117 S.Ct. 1253 , 137 L.Ed.2d 333 (1997); Woodson v. … In Riess v.

Grossman v. Commissioner

687 F. Supp. 1401 · District Court, N.D. California · Jun 22, 1987

Administrative level review is available before the Merit Systems Protection Board. … Caddington v. United States, 178 F.Supp. 604, 606 (Ct.Cl.1959).

Society for Individual Rights, Inc. v. Hampton

63 F.R.D. 399 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 31, 1973

The decision of the Board of Appeals and Review leaves no question that its decision is based solely upon the fact that plaintiff is presently a homosexual person and the Commission’s view that the employment of such persons … In Norton v. Macy, 135 U.S.App.D.C. 214 , 417 F.2d 1161 (1969), a discharge on precisely this ground was considered and held to be so arbitrary and capricious as to violate due process requirements.

United States Securities & Exchange Commission v. Henke

275 F. Supp. 2d 1075 · District Court, N.D. California · Jul 31, 2003

SEC v. … (quoting SEC v.

Chavez

District Court, N.D. California · May 15, 2026

See Concha v. … See Yeseta v.

Bhandary

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

Brown, No. 24-787, 2025 WL 1778824, at *1 (9th 7 Cir. … Affirmative Action v. Brown, 674 F.3d 1128, 24 1134 (9th Cir. 2012).

St. Joseph's Hospital v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield Ass'n/Blue Cross of California

721 F. Supp. 1160 · District Court, N.D. California · Jun 27, 1989

See Bowen v. … Agnes Hospital v.

In Re Flash Memory Antitrust Litigation

643 F. Supp. 2d 1133 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 31, 2009

See Todd v. … Ford v.

Bioscience Advisors, Inc. v. United States Securities and Exchange Commission

District Court, N.D. California · Feb 22, 2022

eB pO utY y N AT ssO isN tan t Attorney General 2 PARR BROWN GEE & LOVELESS, P.C. ELIZABETH J. … 12 BIOSCIENCE ADVISORS, INC., Civil Action No. 4:21-CV-0866-HSG 13 Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND ORDER v.

Gonzalez v. Google, Inc.

282 F. Supp. 3d 1150 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 23, 2017

Patten v. United States , 116 F.3d 1029 , 1033 (4th Cir. 1997) (quoting Gallenstein v. United States , 975 F.2d 286 , 290 (6th Cir. 1992) ). … See Blumenthal v.

Hampsmire v. City of Santa Cruz

899 F. Supp. 2d 922 · District Court, N.D. California · Sep 28, 2012

In re Brown, 9 Cal.3d 612, 621 , 108 Cal.Rptr. 465 , 510 P.2d 1017 (Cal.1973). … In re Brown, 9 Cal.3d 612, 620, 108 Cal.Rptr. 465 , 510 P.2d 1017 (Cal.1973).

Karasek v. Regents of the University of California

226 F. Supp. 3d 1009 · District Court, N.D. California · Dec 22, 2016

But the standard set by the United States Supreme Court in Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education, 526 U.S. 629 , 119 S.Ct. 1661 , 143 L.Ed.2d 839 (1999), and applied by the Ninth Circuit in Oden v. North. … In Doe v.

At & T Communications of California, Inc. v. Pacific Bell Telephone Co.

228 F. Supp. 2d 1086 · District Court, N.D. California · Aug 6, 2002

See Iowa Utilities Board I, 525 U.S. at 377, 385 , 119 S.Ct. 721 . … See Verizon, 122 S.Ct. at 1682-87 (reversing Eighth Circuit’s ruling in Iowa Utilities Board II that invalidated Rules 315(c)-(f)); see also AT & T Corp. v. Iowa Utils.

John Muir Memorial Hospital, Inc. v. Califano

457 F. Supp. 848 · District Court, N.D. California · Sep 22, 1978

Section 1395oo(f)(l) permits a provider to seek review in the courts only after the Provider Reimbursement Review Board (“PRRB”) has rendered a “final decision.” … Hosp., Inc. v.

Illinois Union Insurance Co. v. Intuitive Surgical, Inc.

179 F. Supp. 3d 958 · District Court, N.D. California · Apr 14, 2016

Dollar Systems, Inc. v. Avcar Leasing Systems, Inc., 890 F.2d 165 , 170 (9th Cir.1989). This right extends to affirmative defenses, which are legal in nature. See Brown v. … Co. v.

Warm Springs Dam Task Force v. Gribble

431 F. Supp. 320 · District Court, N.D. California · Apr 28, 1977

(Warm Springs Dam Task Force v. Gribble, 378 F.Supp. 240 [D.C. 1974].) … Warm Springs Dam Task Force v.

Christopher T. v. San Francisco Unified School District

553 F. Supp. 1107 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 31, 1982

District of Columbia Board of Education, 471 F.Supp. 136 (D.D.C.1979). … See, e.g., Hines v. Pitt County Board of Education, 497 F.Supp. 403 (E.D.N.C.1980); Howard S. v. Friendswood Independent School District, 454 F.Supp. 634 (S.D.Tex.1978). 44 .