Case law

In re Lawrence

80 F. 99 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 19, 1897

The subject has frequently been under consideration, and has been elaborately considered with respect to all the elements of jurisdiction, and the law with respect thereto clearly established. … These cases clearly establish the doctrine that, except, perhaps, under extraordinary circumstances, United States courts will not, by means of the writ of habeas corpus, take jurisdiction over proceedings in state, tribunals

Nieto v. Allison

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 12, 2025

ECF No. 35-1 at 21-22. 4 The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil 5 damages as long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … To determine whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, the Court must 15 consider whether (1) the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right, and (2) that right was 16 clearly established at the time

Bess v. Peffley

District Court, N.D. California · Aug 2, 2023

A court 9 considering a claim of qualified immunity must determine whether the plaintiff has alleged the 10 deprivation of an actual constitutional right and whether such right was clearly established such 11 that … Id. at 236. 15 Defendant argues he is entitled to qualified immunity on Plaintiff’s retaliation claim 16 because there is no clearly established law that refusing

Holland v. City of San Francisco

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 24, 2021

Qualified Immunity 15 The defense of qualified immunity protects “government officials . . . from liability for civil 16 damages insofar as their conduct does not violate … clearly established statutory or constitutional rights 17 of which a reasonable person would have known.”

Aeroground, Inc. v. City & County of San Francisco

170 F. Supp. 2d 950 · District Court, N.D. California · Jul 9, 2001

Clearly, the card check rule is not narrow in scope. As noted, it applies to all non-exempt employers at the airport and has the effect of controlling the conduct of these employers in their dealings with third parties. … An intangible injury to a company’s goodwill qualifies as irreparable harm. Rent-A-Center v. Canyon Television & Appliance, 944 F.2d 597 , 603 (9th Cir.1991).

Hynix Semiconductor Inc. v. Rambus, Inc.

527 F. Supp. 2d 1084 · District Court, N.D. California · Nov 4, 2007

The court denied the motion, holding that Noerr-Pennington immunity does not immunize an alleged fraudulent scheme to obtain an improper patent monopoly in violation of the antitrust laws. … On the contrary, California law clearly prohibits attorneys’ fees in two-party actions absent special circumstances that do not apply here.

Powell v. United States Dept. of Justice

584 F. Supp. 1508 · District Court, N.D. California · May 15, 1984

Clearly, these records were compiled for law enforcement purposes. … Clearly, this is not a case of an individual motivated solely by his own interests.

International Union of Bricklayers & Allied Craftsmen v. Meese

616 F. Supp. 1387 · District Court, N.D. California · Aug 28, 1985

Absent a clearly expressed legislative intention to the contrary, the language of the Act is to be regarded as conclusive. … on which litigants may have relied, or by deciding an issue of first impression whose resolution was not clearly foreshadowed.

Cline v. Roberts

District Court, N.D. California · Aug 5, 2021

Qualified Immunity 22 “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil 23 damages ‘unless a plaintiff pleads facts showing ( … “[E]ven absent probable cause, qualified immunity is available if a reasonable police 23 officer could have believed that his or her conduct was lawful, in light of the clearly established 24 law and the information

Dignity Health v. Lightbourne

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

States issue direct payments based 10 on the attestations to providers. 42 U.S.C. § 1396b(t). 11 The HITECH Act establishes the formula for calculating the amount of incentive payments 12 to qualifying … Sovereign Immunity. 26 In addition, California is immune from suit through Defendants on the basis of its 27 sovereign immunity.

Chote v. Brown

342 F. Supp. 1353 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 9, 1972

That the burden is upon the state, not the plaintiff, to establish the requisite justification for its filing fee system, has been clearly indicated by the Supreme Court (p. 149, 92 S.Ct. 849 ); further, it has held that … Further, it is to be noted that Circuit Judge Ely was quoted in the order as dissenting and as entertaining the view that “to condition the candidacy for public office otherwise qualified citizens upon their financial ability

Bynum v. City of Pittsburg

622 F. Supp. 196 · District Court, N.D. California · Nov 27, 1985

The court relied heavily on the fact that the Third Circuit did not have a well-established statute of limitations in § 1983 actions prior to Wilson . … Garcia militate clearly in favor of retroactive application, neither do they militate against such application.” Id. at 196 .

Vasquez v. City of San Jose

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 30, 2022

Qualified Immunity 19 Defendants also argue for entry of summary judgment in their favor because the Officers 20 are entitled to qualified immunity. … Thus even if the 3 Officers’ conduct was excessive their actions would be protected under qualified immunity 4 because their conduct did not violate a clearly established right.

Vasquez v. City of San Jose

District Court, N.D. California · Oct 7, 2022

Qualified Immunity 19 Defendants also argue for entry of summary judgment in their favor because the Officers 20 are entitled to qualified immunity. … Thus even if the 3 Officers’ conduct was excessive their actions would be protected under qualified immunity 4 because their conduct did not violate a clearly established right.

Copas v. East Bay Municipal Utility District

61 F. Supp. 2d 1017 · District Court, N.D. California · May 26, 1999

The court found that because plaintiff clearly exercised “some discretion and independent judgment” during the course of his job, he was an exempt employee. See id. … The court does find, however, that the District has met its burden of establishing that Lepore qualifies as an exempt administrative employee, and that plaintiffs have not provided evidence that creates a disputed issue of

Hillside Community Hospital of Ukiah v. Mathews

423 F. Supp. 1168 · District Court, N.D. California · Nov 9, 1976

Facts Plaintiff is a nonprofit corporation that qualifies as a “provider” of Medicare services within the meaning of the applicable provision of the Medicare Act. 42 U.S.C. § 1395x. … (g) Establishment of cost basis on purchase of facility as an ongoing operation.

Sodipo v. Rosenberg

77 F. Supp. 3d 997 · District Court, N.D. California · Jan 12, 2015

On January 11, 2011, USCIS issued a decision concluding that Sodipo had not established that he qualified for a national interest waiver. … Sodipo must show that he himself “clearly present[s] a significant benefit to the field of endeavor.” Id.

Lopez v. Contra Costa Regional Medical Center

903 F. Supp. 2d 835 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 10, 2012

the receiving facility, and transfer by qualified personnel who can provide life support measures during the transfer). … The court agrees — and Defendants do not dispute — that the CMS Regulations clearly indicate that a hospital has EMTALA obligations towards women who request treatment in a labor and delivery department.

Grimes v. Chisum

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

The defense of 21 qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar 22 as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of 23 which … A court considering a claim of qualified immunity must determine whether the 25 plaintiff has alleged the deprivation of an actual constitutional right and whether such right 26 was clearly established such that it

Gilmore v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A.

75 F. Supp. 3d 1255 · District Court, N.D. California · Dec 16, 2014

National Mortgage Settlement (NMS) immunity Wells Fargo argues that its compliance with the NMS shields it from liability under the HBOR. … Third Cause of Action: Negligence Wells Fargo argues that Plaintiffs negligence claim fails because he has not established that it owed him a duty of care.