Case law

Sausalito Pharmacy v. Blue Shield of California

544 F. Supp. 230 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 16, 1981

In denying this motion, we held that the second criteria in establishing immunity — the policy must be actively supervised by the state itself — was not sufficiently established. … The only case cited by plaintiffs is clearly distinguishable.

Loggervale v. County of Alameda

District Court, N.D. California · Oct 4, 2021

If not, qualified immunity shields the official defendants. 20 Here, plaintiffs assert four theories. … Under 14 the specific circumstances here, the official conduct was clearly unlawful, so qualified 15 immunity does not shield defendants from plaintiffs’ unreasonable search claims under Section 16 1983.

Smith v. Office of the Alameda County Public Defender

District Court, N.D. California · Aug 9, 2023

Qualified Immunity 20 “Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the 21 official violated a statutory or constitutional right that … was clearly established at the time of the 22 challenged conduct.”

Doe v. Attorney General of the United States

723 F. Supp. 452 · District Court, N.D. California · Aug 25, 1989

Plaintiff has contracted acquired immune deficiency syndrome (“AIDS”). On or about August 15, 1988, someone advised the Bureau that plaintiff had Kaposi’s Sarcoma, an AIDS-related illness. … Section 39.170 establishes this process.” 28 C.F.R. § 39.170 Editorial Note at 402 (1988) (emphasis added).

Williams v. Miller

48 F. Supp. 277 · District Court, N.D. California · Dec 7, 1942

Chapter 9 of Division III, §§ 7000-7139, of the California Business and Professions Code, St.1939, c. 37, pp. 381-395, as amended, St.1939, c. 967, c. 1091, pp. 2718, 3020, St.1941, c. 882, c. 971, pp. 2460, 2602, rules are established … The plaintiff’s demurrer to the answer was sustained, and this was affirmed by the Supreme Court on the ground that the statute clearly appeared to be a reasonable exercise of the police power in a matter of grave public

Dominguez v. City Of San Jose

District Court, N.D. California · May 16, 2022

established law, and thus is entitled to qualified immunity. … Plaintiffs cite cases they 14 contend clearly establish that the use of force was excessive.

Rundle v. Madigan

356 F. Supp. 1048 · District Court, N.D. California · Nov 20, 1972

In addition to their other contentions, defendants interpose the defense of sovereign immunity against all the acts complained cf. … Clearly, conspiracy must still involve an allegation and proof of purpose. Plaintiffs argue that the language of Cohen v. Norris eliminates the purpose requirement. This Court disagrees.

Xavier v. Tanori

District Court, N.D. California · Oct 13, 2021

Ferrari is Entitled to Qualified Immunity. 1 The Court further finds that Defendant Ferrari is entitled to qualified … and the information she possessed at the time, she is protected by qualified immunity.”

Roman v. City of Richmond

570 F. Supp. 1544 · District Court, N.D. California · Sep 1, 1983

Defendants do not contest that they bear the burden of proof on their good faith immunity defense. … Despite defendants’ unsupported conclusion, judicial economy was clearly served by consolidation of these actions.

Wang v. OCZ Technology Group, Inc.

276 F.R.D. 618 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 14, 2011

for immunity as an “interactive computer service” or is subject to liability as an “information content provider.” … OCZ argues that precedent in this circuit establishes websites as interactive computer services, especially considering the Ninth Circuit’s determination that “courts have treated § 230(c) immunity as quite robust, adopting

AGG v. City of Hayward

District Court, N.D. California · Oct 13, 2020

Qualified Immunity 17 The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil 18 damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly … Clearly Established Rights 10 Defendants argue that Wooley and Clark are entitled to qualified immunity because it was 11 “not clearly established at the time of the incident that using deadly

Moreno v. Perez-Pantoja

District Court, N.D. California · Jan 5, 2024

, and (2) that right was clearly 12 established at the time of officer’s misconduct. … Defendant Perez-Pantoja argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity 25 because there is no controlling legal authority clearly establishing that conducting a random cell 26 search with latex gloves and mask was

Serpa v. SBC Telecommunications, Inc.

318 F. Supp. 2d 865 · District Court, N.D. California · May 24, 2004

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 *870 that no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and that it is … First National Bank, 299 U.S. 109, 112 , 57 S.Ct. 96 , 81 L.Ed. 70 (1936) ("[A] right or immunity created by the Constitution or laws of the United States must be an element, and an essential one, of the plaintiff’s cause

King v. National General Insurance

129 F. Supp. 3d 925 · District Court, N.D. California · Sep 15, 2015

Ins.Code § 1861.025 (defining persons qualified to purchase a “Good Driver Discount policy”); § 1861.02(b)(1) (“Every person who meets the criteria of Section 1861.025 shall be qualified to purchase a Good Driver Discount … That proposition is clearly not relevant to Plaintiffs’- implied covenant claim, which is not based 'on a first party bad faith claim.

Gerald Len Cooley, Jr. v. William Jeha

District Court, N.D. California · Jul 1, 2021

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY 26 Cooley also moves for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. … “The second prong of the qualified-immunity analysis asks 3 || whether the right in question was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the violation.”

League of Academic Women v. Regents of the University of California

343 F. Supp. 636 · District Court, N.D. California · May 26, 1972

That case was decided on other grounds, and the language referred to by defendants is clearly dicta. … The rationale of this opinion is clearly germane to the situation in the case now before this Court.

Viacom International Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission

828 F. Supp. 741 · District Court, N.D. California · Jun 1, 1993

Section 5 of the 1992 Act governs the carriage of qualified non-commercial television stations. … As applied to Viacom, it requires that Viacom systems with usable activated channel capacity of 13 to 36 channels carry up to three qualified local non-commercial stations.

Kettmann v. City Of San Jose

District Court, N.D. California · Jul 7, 2021

Qualified immunity protects “government officials...from liability 26 for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or 27 constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … 25 established” right, the Court grants summary judgment as to the defense of qualified 26 immunity. 27 C.

Estate of Cartwright v. City of Concord, Cal.

618 F. Supp. 722 · District Court, N.D. California · Aug 19, 1985

Because of the above decisions, the court need not and does not consider the issues of damages or the other defenses raised by defendants, including qualified immunity, contributory negligence, superseding cause, and state … law immunity.

Ciria v. City and County of San Francisco

District Court, N.D. California · May 21, 2024

Qualified Immunity 17 While acknowledging that Devereaux established a general right to not be charged based 18 on deliberately fabricated evidence, Defendants argue that … to qualified immunity because it was 4 “reasonably arguable that there was probable cause.”