Case law

Union Pacific Railroad v. California Public Utilities Commission

109 F. Supp. 2d 1186 · District Court, N.D. California · Jul 20, 2000

Applicability of Dormant Commerce Clause As a threshold matter, defendants contend that the two train make-up rules at issue are immune from challenge under the dormant commerce clause. … Accordingly, with respect to this subset of sites, plaintiffs have failed to establish any violation of the commerce clause.

In re Wong Kim Ark

71 F. 382 · District Court, N.D. California · Jan 3, 1896

That its main purpose was to establish the citizenship of the negro can admit of no doubt. … It is that the distinction between citizenship of the United States and citizenship of a state is clearly recognized and es-iablished.

United States v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.

363 F. Supp. 644 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 23, 1973

Thus the ultimate question is whether Stockton qualified as a “designated terminal”, § 61(b)(3)(A); if so, by necessary implication, it operated to interrupt the continuity of the period of service for more than four hours … These almost conclusively establish that the accepted terminology in the industry is “home terminal” and “away-from-home terminal”.

Kropp v. Scott

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 23, 2019

clearly established statutory or constitutional rights 7 of which a reasonable person would have known.” … qualified immunity.”

United States v. Fishman

743 F. Supp. 713 · District Court, N.D. California · Apr 13, 1990

However, the ev-identiary record of controversy and significant rejection of these views provided by the government in this case is clearly more compelling. … Even if collateral evidence may be admissible in some cases where an expert bases an opinion upon assumptions of fact provided by such evidence, it is clearly not admissible here, where the ultimate expert opinion itself

Bryan v. United Parcel Service, Inc.

307 F. Supp. 2d 1108 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 2, 2004

FEHA requires that the particular claimant have a qualifying mental or physical disability. Cal. Gov’t Code 12926(i), (k). … On the record presented, however, the Court finds that whether plaintiffs are qualified raises an issue of material fact.

Cobarrubia v. Edwards

District Court, N.D. California · Feb 25, 2021

“The doctrine of qualified 23 immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct 24 does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … right was not clearly established at the time of 1 (internal quotations omitted). 2 Ultimately, Defendants’ qualified immunity arguments are based on their argument that

Drawsand v. F.F. Properties, L.L.P.

866 F. Supp. 2d 1110 · District Court, N.D. California · Sep 30, 2011

Moreover, Drawsand cannot establish that she suffered any distinct and palpable injury as a result of any of the County Defendants’ actions. … Here, Drawsand fails to allege any facts to establish any of the requisite elements of an ADA or RA claim.

(PC) Fletcher v. Lomeli

District Court, N.D. California · Dec 23, 2019

immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil 10 damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … qualified immunity.”

Lynch v. Rank

604 F. Supp. 30 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 9, 1984

SSI aids the aged, blind, and disabled poor by paying each covered person enough money to bring his or her income up to a federally-established minimum level. … The Ciampa court then rejected the government’s advocacy of the “solely” test because the statute’s clear language establishes a “but for” test.

Presta v. Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board

16 F. Supp. 2d 1134 · District Court, N.D. California · Aug 12, 1998

“The plain language of the amendment clearly incorporates the entire ADA into § 51 ... The only plausible interpretation is that the amendment makes § 51 coextensive with the ADA.” McCormack v. … Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act mandates that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs

Bey v. Gascon

District Court, N.D. California · Oct 15, 2019

This is an act that is clearly covered in 14 prosecutorial immunity. … May 3, 2016) (“Plaintiff 2 had no constitutional right, much less a clearly established one, to disregard Defendants' lawful 3 orders or to do so without the consequence of arrest under these circumstances.”).

Stillwater

District Court, N.D. California · Jul 30, 2026

Likewise, Section 504 of the 2 Rehabilitation Act lacks “[t]he clarity of expression necessary to establish a waiver of the 3 Government’s sovereign immunity against monetary damages.” … Stillwater’s disability discrimination claim, Section 504 provides that “[nJo 5 otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States . . . shall, solely by reason of 6 || her or his disability

Jiau v. Tews

District Court, N.D. California · Jul 12, 2021

13 immunity. … Qualified Immunity 12 Federal officials are entitled to a qualified immunity defense whether they are

Winchester v. Ward

District Court, N.D. California · Jun 3, 2020

Qualified Immunity 7 Qualified immunity is a question of law, not of fact. Torres v. City of Los Angeles, 548 8 F.3d 1197, 1210 (9th Cir. 2008). … The qualified immunity doctrine shields a government official 9 performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages if the officer’s conduct does 10 not violate a “clearly established statutory or constitutional

Sugarman v. Forbragd

267 F. Supp. 817 · District Court, N.D. California · May 11, 1967

Section 553 (formerly 1003) deals with rule making and is clearly inapplicable here. … The sovereign is immune from suit unless it has consented to such suit. 2.

United States v. City and County of San Francisco

696 F. Supp. 1287 · District Court, N.D. California · Jun 10, 1988

These facts clearly establish a prima facie violation of law_” Davis I, 656 F.Supp. at 282 . … Where generalized societal discrimination has prevented minorities from acquiring the skills necessary to become part of the qualified labor force, the statistical comparison is too crude to establish a prima facie case.

United States v. Stewart

306 F. Supp. 29 · District Court, N.D. California · Jun 25, 1969

hardly reaches a resounding conclusion to the contrary when they refer to the sentence in the statute by saying: This seems to us to be a Congressional imprimatur, albeit an abbreviated one, on the delinquency procedures established … The Selective Service Act of 1967 is a clear Congressional mandate that the national interest requires deferment of qualified students. Kimball v.

United States Ex Rel. Fine v. University of California

821 F. Supp. 1356 · District Court, N.D. California · Apr 7, 1993

The IGA establishes independent agencies within each federal department to monitor, investigate and report fraud. The purposes of the acts are the same—to ferret out fraud against the government. … Fine is not an “original source” of the information on which he bases his complaint, there is no need to address defendants’ separation of powers or sovereign immunity arguments.

In re Wells Fargo Home Mortgage Overtime Pay Litigation

268 F.R.D. 604 · District Court, N.D. California · Jan 13, 2010

This is clearly the case here, as the applicability of the outside sales exemption can only be resolved through an *613 examination of how each class member spent his or-her working day. … For example, plaintiff avers that if, as Wells Fargo claims, the HMCs qualify for the administrative exemption, they cannot also qualify for the outside sales exemption or the commissioned sales exemption.