Case law

Aguilar v. Napa County Board of Supervisors

District Court, N.D. California · Feb 29, 2024

See Balistreri v. … See Shaw v.

Provident Securities Co. v. Foremost-McKesson, Inc.

331 F. Supp. 787 · District Court, N.D. California · Sep 15, 1971

Petteys v. Butler, 367 F.2d 528, 533 (8th Cir.). … See, e. g., Heli-Coil Corp. v. *792 Webster, 352 F.2d 156 (3d Cir. 1965). We have rejected this interpretation, see Blau v.

Williams v. Alameda County Board of Supervisors

District Court, N.D. California · Feb 24, 2023

Rubber Co. v. … Ballinger v.

In re High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation

289 F.R.D. 555 · District Court, N.D. California · Apr 5, 2013

Brown Deck, Ex. 27. In contrast to Dr. … Maupin (Lueasfilm), Brown Deck, Ex. 22; and (5) Rosemary Arriada-Keiper (Adobe), Brown Deck, Ex. 24.

In Re Farmers Frozen Food Company

221 F. Supp. 385 · District Court, N.D. California · Aug 30, 1963

See also City of Madera v. Black, 181 Cal. 306, 310 , 184 P. 397 . 4 . City of New York v. Feiring, supra; United States v. New York, supra; New Jersey v. Anderson, supra; Meriwether v. … Parker v. Brown, 317 U.S. 341, 367 , 63 S.Ct. 307 , 87 L.Ed. 315 .

Import Motors II, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

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

See Kaufmann v. Kijakazi, 32 F.4th 843, 849 (9th Cir. 2022); Decker Coal Co. v. Pehringer, 8 F.4th 1123, 1137-38 (9th Cir. 2021). This requirement originates from the Supreme Court’s decision in Collins v. … Nor is there any basis to conclude that the President has been thwarted in efforts to remove NLRB ALJs or Board Members.

Morales v. Cate

757 F. Supp. 2d 961 · District Court, N.D. California · Dec 10, 2010

Morales v. Woodford, 388 F.3d 1159 (9th Cir.2004); Brown v. Ornoski, 503 F.3d 1006 (9th Cir.2007). The present action involves only the means by which Plaintiffs will be executed. … Id. at 1034 (Browning, J., concurring).

Maples v. Solarwinds, Inc.

50 F. Supp. 3d 1221 · District Court, N.D. California · Jun 23, 2014

Dkt. 43 ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG, United States District Judge This is a diversity jurisdiction action brought by Plaintiff Mike Maples (“Plaintiff … See Coleman v.

Fidelity Financial Corp. v. Federal Home Loan Bank

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

Id. at 350 [ 95 S.Ct. at 453 ] ”); Roberts v. Cameron-Brown Co., *897 556 F.2d 356, 358 (5th Cir.1977). Compare Northrip v. Fed. … See, e.g., Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 572 , 92 S.Ct. 2701, 2706 , 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972); Santa Clara v. Andrus, 572 F.2d 660 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 859 , 99 S.Ct. 176 , 58 L.Ed.2d 167 (1978).

W. R. Grace & Co. v. Toyo Kisen Kabushiki Kaisha

7 F.2d 889 · District Court, N.D. California · Sep 15, 1925

The doctrines of Glynn v. Margetson were followed in England in White v. Granada S. S. Co., 13 T. L. R. 1, The Dunboth, 8 Asp. M. C. 307, Sergeant v. East Asiatic S. S. Co., 21 Com. Cas. 334, and Smith v. … In this country, Judge Brown adopted Lord Herschell’s views in Calderon v. Atlas Steamship Co., 64 P. 874 (affirmed by the Circuit Court of Appeals 69 F. 574 , 16 C. C. A. 332 , and the Supreme. Court 170 U.

McMullin v. Blackburn

59 F. 177 · District Court, N.D. California · Dec 11, 1893

In Waterbury v. … McConnochie v. Kerr, 9 Fed. 50 , decided by Judge Brown in 1881, is the next case.

Lim v. New York State Board of Law Examiners

District Court, N.D. California · Jul 28, 2025

Bay Sanctuary 8 Covenant v. Trump, 932 F.3d 742, 762 (9th Cir. 2018). Plaintiff’s papers fail to establish that he is 9 likely to succeed on the merits. … Zimmerman v. City of Oakland, 255 F.3d 25 734, 740 (9th Cir. 2001). Plaintiff has failed to address this standard.

Brown

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 16, 2026

Falk v. Allen, 739 F.2d 461, 463 (9th Cir. 1984). 3 Here, Defendant satisfies the good cause factors. … See e.g, Rosenbaum v. Sec. Pac. Corp., 43 Cal. 20 || App. 4th 1084, 1091 (Cal.

Phillip James Brown, Jr. v. Imperfect Foods Inc., et al.

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 10, 2026

Curtis v. Irwin Indus., Inc., 913 F.3d 1146, 1151–52 (9th 4 Cir. 2019) (quoting Allis-Chalmers Corp. v. Lueck, 471 U.S. 202, 210 (1985)). … Life Ins. v. Taylor, 481 U.S. 58, 65 (1987)).

Tibbol v. Marion

79 F. 104 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 5, 1897

Law, 579; Brown v. Lull, 2 Sumn. 443, 452 , Fed. Cas. No. 2,018. … As was aptly said by Judge Ware, in Poland v.

United States v. Parramore

720 F. Supp. 799 · District Court, N.D. California · Aug 28, 1989

United States v. Everett, 700 F.2d 900 (3rd Cir.1983). … See United States v.

SAFEWAY INC. v. City and County of San Francisco

797 F. Supp. 2d 964 · District Court, N.D. California · Jul 15, 2011

Doby v. Brown, 232 F.2d 504, 506 (4th Cir.1956). Plaintiff asks the Court to construe the amended ordinance in such a way as to avoid the constitutional issues it asserts in its subsequent causes of action. … O’Hagen v. Board of Zoning Adjustment, 19 Cal.App.3d 151, 158 , 96 Cal. Rptr. 484 (1971).

Danford v. Schwabacher

342 F. Supp. 65 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 23, 1972

In Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. … Recent cases have held, with convincing logic, that neither § 14 nor § 29 invalidates agreements of stock exchange members or agreements between dealers to arbitrate in accordance with exchange rules, Brown v.

Lim v. New York State Board of Law Examiners

District Court, N.D. California · May 7, 2025

Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32 (1992). … See Ashcroft v.

Carnegie Mellon University v. Hoffmann-LaRoche, Inc.

55 F. Supp. 2d 1024 · District Court, N.D. California · May 12, 1999

See Anderson v. … See Markman v.