Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
2,024 results
0.64s
District Court, S.D. California · Nov 9, 2021
“To establish § 1983 liability, a plaintiff must show both (1) deprivation of a 1 right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and (2) that the deprivation 2 was committed by a person acting under … ALL PAYMENTS MUST BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED BY THE 22 NAME AND NUMBER ASSIGNED TO THIS ACTION. 23 3) The Court DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to serve a copy of this Order by
Cited 0 timesUnknown148 F. Supp. 2d 1069 · District Court, S.D. California · Apr 27, 2001
Certificates are sufficient in the absence of contrary evidence to establish that assessments were properly made and to establish the adequacy and propriety of notices of intent to levy. Hansen v. … In addition, the Boyces argue that Yarbrough is speculating in his declaration and that he has not been qualified as an expert witness. The Court does not find the Boyces’ arguments persuasive.
Cited 40 timesPublishedSandoval v. City of National City
District Court, S.D. California · Aug 17, 2023
would also be immune.” … Moreover, National City 17 and NCPD’s immunity depends upon whether the police officers are immune.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. California · Apr 21, 2022
Defendant contends that federal question jurisdiction exists under Grabel because 4 Plaintiff’s claims “implicate disputed and substantial federal issues under the PREP Act”— 5 specifically whether the PREP act confers immunity … See, e.g., Thomas, 2022 WL 845349, at *4 (“Garcia was 12 clearly abrogated on this issue by the Ninth Circuit in Saldana.”).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. California · Mar 24, 2026
Cal. 2000) 19 (“It is well-established that federal courts sitting in diversity must apply state substantive 20 law and federal procedural rules.”). … knowledge, and other conditions of a person’s mind may be alleged 1 generally” and holding that “Plaintiff states a claim for punitive damages for his state law 2 claims because his third amended complaint clearly
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. California · Sep 23, 2025
“The State of California has not waived its Eleventh Amendment 14 immunity with respect to claims brought under § 1983 in federal court.” Dittman, 191 F.3d 15 at 1025–26; see Alabama v. … 28 /// 1 (1) he ‘is an individual with a disability;’ (2) he ‘is otherwise qualified
Cited 0 timesUnknown167 F. Supp. 579 · District Court, S.D. California · Oct 29, 1958
He was, in the language of the profession, rotating in the various services in order to complete a four-year residency necessary to qualify as a practitioner in general surgery. … Cunningham, Jr., was the chief operating surgeon, the evidence in the record shows clearly that two others of long experience in orthopedic surgery, Dr. Adamson and Dr.
Cited 7 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. California · Mar 12, 2026
FTCA 6 The FTCA “waives the sovereign immunity of the United States for certain torts 7 committed by federal employees ‘under circumstances where the United States … As explained 21 further below, the declaration from Plaintiff’s current counsel, submitted in support of 22 Plaintiff’s Opposition, does not clearly indicate whether Plaintiff’s April 7, 2022 claim was 23 withdrawn,
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. California · Mar 15, 2021
at 22–24; and (3) 5 Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity, see id. at 24–26. 6 Magistrate Judge Burkhardt’s R&R recommends that the Court grant Defendants’ 7 Motion. See R&R at 48. … Because Magistrate Judge Burkhardt determined that Plaintiff 16 failed to raise any triable issue of material fact as to his asserted claims, she did not address 17 Defendants’ qualified immunity defense.
Cited 0 timesUnknownFritsch v. City of Chula Vista
187 F.R.D. 614 · District Court, S.D. California · Jul 14, 1999
First, courts in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania had recognized a qualified privilege prior to the decision in Jajfee, and had held that a litigant could waive the privilege by placing his or her mental condition in … The Jaffee court clearly did not intend that this important privilege be waived for such a purpose.
Modified on other grounds by Doe v. City of Chula Vista, 196 F.R.D. 562 (1999)Cited 16 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. California · Aug 20, 2021
The 4 district court reviews whether the decision is “clearly erroneous or is contrary to law.” 5 Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a); see also Osband v. … Nov. 5, 2020) 24 (finding Plaintiff had not carried his burden to show that the Magistrate Judge’s order 25 was clearly erroneous or contrary to law).
Cited 0 timesUnknownGarnier v. Poway Unified School District
District Court, S.D. California · Jan 14, 2021
On September 26, 2019, Judge Thomas J. 2 Whelan issued an order granting Defendants’ motion with respect to Plaintiffs’ damages 3 claim reasoning that damages were barred by qualified immunity. … Plaintiffs’ repetitive posting was also clearly 4 established by the evidence at trial.
Cited 0 timesUnknownWilliams & Cochrane, LLP v. Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Indian Reservation
District Court, S.D. California · Sep 10, 2019
The sovereign immunity argument is unavailing because the Court 12 ruled more than six months prior that the Tribe had waived its sovereign immunity as to 13 claims based on W&C’s attorney-client relationship with the … These letters qualify as 13 demand letters.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. California · Jun 3, 2021
The state court decision must be more than 11 incorrect; to warrant habeas relief the state court’s application of “clearly established 12 federal law” must be “objectively unreasonable.” Lockyer v. … However, as discussed above, the Court of Appeal opinion is 8 not contrary to clearly established Supreme Court law and does not involve an 9 unreasonable application of clearly established Supreme Court law
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. California · Nov 1, 2021
But the Complaint does not clearly allege where Defendant is domiciled. … However, it is likewise a condition on the waiver of sovereign immunity and thus has been strictly construed to 25 permit extension only in special circumstances. Sovereign immunity is jurisdictional in nature.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. California · Oct 27, 2022
The argument Ligand improperly qualified the orders does not 26 mean that Ms. … Plaintiff that they had qualified the 401(k) QDRO.
Cited 0 timesUnknownAllele Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Pfizer, Inc.
District Court, S.D. California · May 4, 2021
“In other words, dismissal 17 based on an affirmative defense is permitted when the complaint establishes the defense.” 18 Id. 19 B. … May 28, 2014) (“‘[R]esearch tools’ do not qualify for protection 5 under § 271(e)(1).”); PSN Illinois, LLC v. Abbott Lab’ys, No. 09 C 5879, 2011 WL 6 4442825, at *5 (N.D. Ill.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. California · Sep 30, 2019
They’re not qualifying whether it's covered by 408. They’re not challenging any of that. … Id. 25 Factual determinations are clearly erroneous if “illogical, implausible, or without support 26 in the record.” Rets v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. California · Oct 1, 2019
They’re not qualifying whether it's covered by 408. They’re not challenging any of that. … Id. 25 Factual determinations are clearly erroneous if “illogical, implausible, or without support 26 in the record.” Rets v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownTorfason v. Internal Revenue Service
District Court, S.D. California · Nov 8, 2022
, the Court must screen a 21 ||prisoner’s IFP complaint and sua sponte dismiss it to the extent that it is frivolous, 22 malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks damages from defendants who are immune … 9 ||PAYMENTS MUST BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED BY THE NAME AND NUMBE! 10 || ASSIGNED TO THIS ACTION; 11 3) DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to serve a copy of this Order by U.S.
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna