Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
4,050 results
1.45s
District Court, N.D. California · Sep 4, 2025
Second, in the alternative, Davis is entitled to qualified 10 immunity because the law is not clearly established that directing a prisoner to ascend steps onto a 11 transport van while in restraints posed a sufficiently … Finally, Defendant Davis is not entitled to qualified immunity for two reasons. First, 17 Frost v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. California · Aug 17, 2020
Qualified 21 immunity protects officers from challenge to conduct that did not “violate[] a statutory or 22 constitutional right that was clearly established at the time.” … qualified immunity applies.”). 10 Thus, Defendants’ Motion is DENIED as to Claim One. 11 B.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. California · Jan 27, 2026
immunity for its officers shields it from liability. … To determine whether an officer is 23 entitled to qualified immunity, the Court must consider whether (1) the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right and (2) that right was clearly established at the time
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. California · Oct 15, 2024
immunity on the grounds that 19 following a supervisor’s orders to discipline an inmate, even when reasons are not given 20 for those orders, does not violate clearly established federal law. 21 1. … Whether Officer Welch is entitled to qualified immunity 19 Officer Welch argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity because he followed 20 what he thought to be a valid order and was not obligated to confirm
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. California · Apr 9, 2020
barred by qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity 19 || protects public officials from civil liability so long as “their conduct does not violate clearly 20 || established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. California · Mar 29, 2023
Qualified Immunity 21 Defendants contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … The defense of 22 qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar 23 as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of 24 which
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. California · Feb 28, 2022
right, and (2) whether 20 that right was clearly established at the time of the incident. … With respect to the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, the Supreme Court 25 has recently held that “[a]n officer cannot be said to have violated a clearly established right unless 26 the right’s contours
Cited 0 timesUnknown308 F. Supp. 1238 · District Court, N.D. California · Feb 3, 1970
Defendants argue that since the same procedure is followed to determine whether an applicant is qualified to be a member of the Oakland Police Department, no matter what his racial or ethnic background, that therefore no … The court in Griggs concluded, however, that The evidence establishes that the tests were 'professionally developed to perform this function and therefore are in compliance with the Act. (Emphasis added.) (Id.)
Cited 37 timesPublished984 F. Supp. 1257 · District Court, N.D. California · Jul 31, 1997
Professor Fiske is clearly qualified as an expert in the fields of social psychology, social relations, and stereotyping. … Hoffman is clearly qualified to testify as an expert possessing specialized knowledge with respect to employee job interests and mechanisms for determining such interests. Notwithstanding Dr.
Cited 6 timesPublishedCounty of Santa Clara v. Astra United States, Inc.
428 F. Supp. 2d 1029 · District Court, N.D. California · Feb 14, 2006
The Public Health Service Act of 1992 established a drug discount program called the Section 340B program. 42 U.S.C. 256b. … Ventura’s alternative ground based on sovereign immunity has been criticized.
Cited 6 timesPublishedLAURIE Q. v. Contra Costa County
304 F. Supp. 2d 1185 · District Court, N.D. California · Feb 17, 2004
Eleventh Amendment Immunity A. … Brewster, 275 F.3d at 807 (“the California Constitution clearly identifies the sheriff as a county officer”) (citation omitted).
Cited 5 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. California · Jun 18, 2026
Third, Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. See generally 24 ECF No. 16. … In 21 addition, a prisoner must not be forced to choose between his clearly established constitutional 22 right to outdoor exercise and other constitutionally protected rights. See Hebbe v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. California · Mar 25, 2026
immunity. … Even if the violated right was clearly established, qualified immunity shields an officer from 20 suit when he makes a decision that, even if constitutionally deficient, reasonably misapprehends 21 the law governing
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. California · Jul 4, 2022
Qualified Immunity Defense 10 The defense of qualified immunity protects “government officials . . . … on qualified immunity is appropriate.
Cited 0 timesUnknown569 F. Supp. 943 · District Court, N.D. California · Feb 1, 1983
. § 653 , approximately contemporaneous with the establishment of the Hoopa Valley Reservation. … Congress can speak clearly if it chooses.
Cited 24 timesPublished787 F. Supp. 2d 1047 · District Court, N.D. California · Apr 18, 2011
Under McDonnell Douglas, a plaintiff must first establish a prima facie case of discrimination by showing that she belongs to a protected class, that she was performing her job satisfactorily (or was qualified for a position … In addition, defendants assert that Pascale has no admissible evidence to support her claim, and cannot meet her burden of overcoming the partial immunity granted to the County.
Cited 27 timesPublishedWhatsApp Inc. v. NSO Group Technologies Limited
District Court, N.D. California · Sep 29, 2020
immunities asserted by defendants would qualify as immunity from 13 suit, i.e., Compania Mexicana (foreign sovereign immunity), Fitzgerald (absolute 14 immunity), Mitchell (qualified immunity), and Metcalf & Eddy ( … to cases in which a contractor ‘had no discretion in 1 establishing a derivative immunity for federal contractors.
Cited 0 timesUnknownAmerican Baptist Churches in the U.S.A. v. Meese
712 F. Supp. 756 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 24, 1989
The central inquiry is whether asserting the claim requires individual participation in establishing the proof. … Second, they raise the defense of sovereign immunity. Third, they argue that Congress has occupied the field of immigration law, leaving no room for federal common law remedies.
Cited 15 timesPublishedCARVER BY AND THROUGH CARVER v. United States
587 F. Supp. 794 · District Court, N.D. California · May 29, 1984
Clearly, Dr. Gale’s testimony, as well as the testimony of Dr. … The decision of the LAMC physicians in April 1979 was supported by two qualified expert witnesses produced by defendant. Dr. Richard F.
Cited 0 timesPublished7 F. Supp. 3d 1016 · District Court, N.D. California · Aug 12, 2014
The Court concludes that the ATOS establishes explicit consent by Yahoo Mail users to Yahoo’s conduct. … Plaintiffs concede that Yahoo has immunity to any alleged § 2701(a) violation pursuant to § 2701(c)(1), which grants immunity for alleged violations of § 2701(a) to ECS providers like Yahoo for accessing electronic communications
Cited 95 timesPublished
Ask Donna