Case law

Neighborhood Market Association, Inc. v. County of San Diego

District Court, S.D. California · Mar 29, 2021

Sec. of State, Nov. 8, 2022 23 Qualified Statewide Ballot Measures, at https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot- 24 measures/qualified-ballot-measures (last visited Mar. 19, 2021). … The Act also “requires the [FDA] to establish tobacco product standards 8 to protect the public health.”

Aguirre v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

District Court, S.D. California · Mar 6, 2023

Those phone records are clearly within the scope of the request, and 6 Defendant’s declarant has not testified that there are no relevant phone records. … Courts “must balance the privacy interests at stake 6 against the public interest in disclosure”, and the “government agency bears the burden of 7 establishing a privacy interest.” Id.

Williams v. Yanez

District Court, S.D. California · May 11, 2020

“To establish § 1983 liability, a plaintiff must show both (1) 2 deprivation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and (2) 3 that the deprivation was committed by a person acting under … ALL PAYMENTS MUST BE 3 || CLEARLY IDENTIFIED BY THE NAME AND NUMBER ASSIGNED TO THIS 4 || ACTION. 5 3.

Kelly v. City of Poway

District Court, S.D. California · May 13, 2022

Section E.3.a.(1) outlines 19 general BMP requirements for onsite and structural BMPs without any qualifying 20 language. See Permit at Section E.3.a.(1). … from liability based on its lobbying and litigation activity, as well as Plaintiff’s response that such immunity does not apply.

Acuna v. Pollard

District Court, S.D. California · Jan 20, 2022

these statutes, the Court must sua 19 sponte dismiss a prisoner’s IFP complaint, or any portion of it, which is frivolous, 20 malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks damages from defendants who are immune … ALL PAYMENTS 13 MUST BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED BY THE NAME AND NUMBER ASSIGNED TO 14 HIS ACTION; 15 (3) DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to serve

California Marine Cleaning, Inc. v. United States

District Court, S.D. California · Jan 14, 2025

Given this testimony that (1) Carr had made this chart, (2) near the time of the fire, 27 (3) about the equipment on the ship during the fire, and (4) that Carr was qualified to testify 28 to this information as the former … Governing admiralty lawsuits, the Public Vessels Act waives federal sovereign 5 immunity for damages caused by a public vessel of the United

Robinson v. Madden

District Court, S.D. California · Sep 20, 2022

prisoner 28 seeking redress from a governmental entity, or officer or employee of a governmental 1 entity, which is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks damages from 2 defendants who are immune … ALL PAYMENTS MUST BE CLEARLY 12 IDENTIFIED BY THE NAME AND NUMBER ASSIGNED TO THIS ACTION; 13 (3) DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to serve a copy of this Order by U.S.

Cecil v. Diaz

District Court, S.D. California · Feb 10, 2020

Under these 15 statutes, the Court must sua sponte dismiss a prisoner’s IFP complaint, or any portion of 16 it, which is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks damages from defendants 17 who are immune … A mere demonstration of inequality is not enough to establish a 1 violation of the equal protection clause. Id.; see also McGinnis v.

Cazares v. City of El Centro

District Court, S.D. California · Mar 3, 2021

,” which include particular pre-employment qualifications a candidate must meet 14 to qualify for employment. … Here, Plaintiff clearly pleads he sustained his injuries in 2015 and 21 2016, FAC at 4, ¶¶ 13-14, well before he worked for Defendants.

Cummings v. Diaz

District Court, S.D. California · Aug 13, 2020

Under these 25 statutes, the Court must sua sponte dismiss a prisoner’s IFP complaint, or any portion of it, 26 which is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks damages from defendants who 27 are immune … ALL PAYMENTS MUST BE CLEARLY 28 IDENTIFIED BY THE NAME AND NUMBER ASSIGNED TO THIS ACTION. 1 3.

Valle v. Obler

District Court, S.D. California · Sep 24, 2024

Cnty. 5 of San Bernardino, 806 F.3d 1002, 1008 (9th Cir. 2015) (“It is well-established in our 6 circuit that an amended complaint supersedes the original, the latter being treated thereafter 7 as non-existent.”) … While Plaintiff fails to clearly 22 identify the legal basis for his specific claims against each individual Defendant, the Court 23 liberally construes the SAC as raising the following claims: (1) Plaintiff

Harley v. Quindiahjen

District Court, S.D. California · Oct 29, 2019

“To establish § 1983 liability, a plaintiff must show both (1) 5 deprivation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and (2) 6 that the deprivation was committed by a person acting under … ALL PAYMENTS MUST BE 8 CLEARLY IDENTIFIED BY THE NAME AND NUMBER ASSIGNED TO THIS 9 ACTION. 10 3.

Bratt v. Carlsbad Police Department

District Court, S.D. California · Aug 19, 2024

Blanas, 393 F.3d 918, 927 (9th Cir. 2004) (noting “a 2 § 1983 action filed in California” would “clearly be governed” by the “two-year statute of 3 limitations for personal injury actions”). … Conclusion 27 Because Plaintiff’s allegations establish that his § 1983 claim accrued in 2019, this 28 action did not commence until nearly five years later

Porter v. Gore

District Court, S.D. California · Feb 5, 2021

(ECF 16 No. 73.) 17 Sergeant Beck meets the requirements of Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and is 18 qualified. … has identified the “when,” “whom,” “where,” and “under what circumstances,” see 26 Italian Colors, 878 F.3d at 1174, Plaintiff’s declaration clearly

Hall v. Val-Chris Investments, Inc.

District Court, S.D. California · Aug 1, 2023

Plaintiff has therefore 27 established a high likelihood of irreparable harm absent a temporary restraining order. See, 28 e.g., Hart v. … Feb. 17, 2023) (“Under California law, a foreclosure sale 2 of a person’s home is presumed to qualify as irreparable harm.” (citing Cal. Civ. Code 3 § 3387; Real Est. Analytics, LLC v. Vallas, 160 Cal.

Dale Sundby and Edith Littlefield Sundby v. Fidelity National Title Insurance Company, Scot Fine, Marquee Funding Group, Inc., Platinum Loan Servicing, Inc., Ryan Joe (R.J.) Solovy, Troy H. Slome, Jeffrey Myers, Kathleen Myers, Andres Salsido, Trustee, Benning Management

District Court, S.D. California · May 28, 2026

Sundby, “in 1 his individual capacity, has an ownership claim over the Property such that he qualifies as 2 a real party in interest. In the absence of an ownership interest, [Mr. … which may seek to rectify standing deficiencies through the purported 5 Assignment would be futile. 6 Further, the FAC and the materials attached thereto clearly

Rademaker v. Paramo

District Court, S.D. California · Sep 26, 2019

“Inmates clearly retain protections afforded 7 by the First Amendment including its directive that no law shall prohibit the free exercise 8 of religion.” O’Lone v. … Additionally, because the Court concludes 21 that no constitutional violation occurred, it need not address Defendants’ qualified 22 immunity argument. See Saucier v.

Partners Alliance Corporation v. Ally Bank

District Court, S.D. California · Oct 28, 2024

The waiver mentions “the Administrator” several other times in the 6 contract, particularly to inform borrowers whom they must contact in the event of a 7 qualifying loss. (See id.) … At most, these allegations establish that Plaintiffs benefit from authorizing the 21 sale of GAP agreements, and that before Defendants ceased withholding cancellation fees 22 from borrowers, Plaintiffs benefited from

Randy Matthew Cordero v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

District Court, S.D. California · Apr 26, 2022

Under these statutes, the 8 Court must sua sponte dismiss a prisoner’s IFP complaint, or any portion of it, which is 9 frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks damages from defendants who are 10 immune … But again, prison officials may establish that legitimate penological interests justify 2 the policy or practice.

Hall v. Val-Chris Investments, Inc.

District Court, S.D. California · Jul 31, 2023

Plaintiff has therefore 27 established a high likelihood of irreparable harm absent a temporary restraining order. See, 28 e.g., Hart v. … Feb. 17, 2023) (“Under California law, a foreclosure sale 2 of a person’s home is presumed to qualify as irreparable harm.” (citing Cal. Civ. Code 3 § 3387; Real Est. Analytics, LLC v. Vallas, 160 Cal.