Case law

Swan v. R. J. Donovan C.F.

District Court, S.D. California · Nov 24, 2021

Delatoore, 281 12 F.3d 844, 847 (9th Cir. 2002). 13 To qualify, § 1915(a)(2) requires prisoners seeking leave to proceed IFP to submit a 14 “certified copy of the trust … § 1983, and 8 are instead agencies of the State of California, both are immune from suit under the 9 Eleventh Amendment.

Herta v. Roberts

District Court, S.D. California · Oct 10, 2024

Although Plaintiff does not reference Section 1983 nor clearly articulate 13 a recognized cause of action, she asserts that Defendant, a judge of the San Diego Superior 14 Court, violated Plaintiff’s right to due process … Abiding by proper evidentiary or service 27 rules fits neatly within the subset of “judicial” acts, thereby immunizing Defendant in this 28 case from civil liability.

Rank v. (Krug) United States

142 F. Supp. 1 · District Court, S.D. California · Jul 11, 1956

Does the present suit qualify as one for “the adjudication of rights to the use of water of a river system or other source”? … If they are not so bound, it is difficult to see how the suit could qualify as a class suit under Eule 23.

Beck v. Catanzarite Law Corporation

District Court, S.D. California · Feb 14, 2023

. ¶ 372 (alleging Judge Gastelum “was appointed to carry on the 22 enterprise schemes to defraud, and he deliberately ignored Beck’s clearly established 23 … Compl. ¶ 716 2 (“Defendant(s) deliberate fabrication of evidence and concealment of truth did cause 3 Plaintiff’s deprivation of liberty”); id. ¶ 727 (“Where Plaintiff had a clearly established 4 right to recover damages

Rudolph v. Saul

District Court, S.D. California · May 14, 2021

Plaintiff qualifies to proceed 10 without paying the initial filing fee, and her complaint states a claim for relief. … “[T]o survive the Court’s § 1915(e) screening,” a plaintiff must (1) “establish 8 that she has exhausted her administrative remedies pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and that 9 the civil action was commenced within sixty

Dr. Seuss Enterprises, L.P. v. Penguin Books USA, Inc.

924 F. Supp. 1559 · District Court, S.D. California · Apr 29, 1996

The Campbell majority does not clearly support either side of the argument. … Legal Stud. 67 , 68 (1992) (a writer’s general style established across a body of work is not copyrightable). 12 .

Montalvo v. Diaz

District Court, S.D. California · Jun 25, 2020

Terhune, 413 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 2005), for the proposition that 3 “the law was clearly established by 2017 . . . that these two population could not safely be 4 mixed or housed together” does not establish Defendants … immunity.

Securities & Exchange Commission v. Los Angeles Trust Deed & Mortgage Exchange

186 F. Supp. 830 · District Court, S.D. California · May 20, 1960

The applicable legal prinei-ples are clearly stated in Hillsborough Investment Corporation v. S. E. C., 1 Cir., 1960, 276 F.2d 665, 667 . … There is no disclosure that the obligors are immune from personal liability.

Price v. San Diego Police Department

District Court, S.D. California · Nov 27, 2024

A § 1983 26 civil-rights claim permits recovery against state officials for the “deprivation of any rights, 27 privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.” 42 U.S.C. … Tanvir, 592 U.S. 43, 50 (2020) (holding that “§ 1983” permits 4 “monetary recovery against officials who violated ‘clearly established’ federal law”). 5 Although he does not say as much, perhaps Price intends to

(PS) Cowan v. United States Department of Health & Human Services

District Court, S.D. California · Oct 9, 2025

. § 1915(e)(2)(B), courts must sua sponte dismiss IFP complaints, or 3 any portions thereof, which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim, or which seek 4 damages from defendants who are immune. … The Court assumes that Plaintiff 6 alleges a due process claim.1 To establish a due process claim, a plaintiff must show 7 government deprivation of life, liberty, or property.

Pine Valley House Resort, LLC v. Newsom

District Court, S.D. California · Mar 10, 2022

Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994). 20 Consequently, “the burden of establishing the contrary rests upon the party asserting 21 jurisdiction.” … that the incidental 9 burdens on interstate and foreign commerce are clearly excessive in relation to the putative 10 local benefits.’”

Corbett v. PharmaCare U.S., Inc.

District Court, S.D. California · Jun 24, 2025

As a relevant example, 5 the FDA defines “supports the immune system” as a structure/function claim. 65 Fed. Reg. 6 1000-01 at 1029. … “Supports immunity” appears on the front label and is accompanied by an 9 asterisk. Id.

Scott v. Napolitano

717 F. Supp. 2d 1071 · District Court, S.D. California · May 3, 2010

These questions clearly qualify as “disability-related inquiries” because they are likely to elicit information about a disability. 6 All of the questions broadly seek information about illnesses, mental conditions, or other … To establish a prima facie case of retaliation under the ADA, the employee must establish that: (1) he or she engaged in a protected activity; (2) suffered an adverse employment action; and (3) there was a causal link between

United States v. Lustig

3 F. Supp. 3d 808 · District Court, S.D. California · Mar 11, 2014

The Court further finds that as to the cell phones found in Lustig’s car, the search does not qualify as a search incident to an arrest. … To do that, prosecutors could be forced to grant the arrestee immunity. “[T]he privilege against self-incrimination could well put encrypted data forever beyond the reach of law enforcement.” Id. 4.

Fields v. Newsom

District Court, S.D. California · Mar 4, 2022

Delatoore, 281 12 F.3d 844, 847 (9th Cir. 2002). 13 To qualify, section 1915(a)(2) requires prisoners seeking leave to proceed IFP to 14 submit a “certified copy of the … “To establish § 1983 liability, a plaintiff must show both (1) deprivation of a 20 right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and (2) that the deprivation 21 was committed by a person acting under

Mueller v. San Diego Entertainment Partners, LLC

260 F. Supp. 3d 1283 · District Court, S.D. California · May 22, 2017

In re Immune Response Sec. Litig., 375 F.Supp.2d 983, 1017 (S.D. Cal. 2005). The heightened pleading requirements of the PSLRA “are an unusual deviation from the usually lenient requirements of federal rule pleadings.” … As noted above, there is an exception to the general rulé that future predictions cannot state a claim for negligent misrepresentation “(1) where a party holds himself out to be specially qualified and the other party is

Briceno v. Williams

District Court, S.D. California · Jun 4, 2021

In 27 late 2020, Briceno filed two summary-judgment responses, setting out his positions clearly 28 and attaching evidence. … immunity analysis as to this Fourth Amendment excessive force claim.”’); see 14 || also ECF 107, at 5 (denying a motion to reconsider the same).)

Salmen v. Bryant

District Court, S.D. California · Nov 3, 2022

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2); Bruce, 577 U.S. at 84. 7 Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, indigency is the benchmark for whether a plaintiff qualifies 8 for IFP status. … Salmen’s evidence of indigency suffices to establish IFP 1 status. Cf. Fernandez v. Madden, No. 22-cv-0446-BAS-WVG, 2022 WL 3109941, at *2 2 (S.D. Cal.

Jungers v. City of San Diego

District Court, S.D. California · Dec 22, 2021

Id. 28 1 With respect to injuries to prisoners, Government Code § 844.6(a)(2) “establishes 2 the State’s immunity to … The problem with Jungers’ argument is that 20 “[t]he first clause of section 845.6 establishes the immunity generally of both the public 21 entity and its employees from liability ‘for injury proximately caused by the

Aragon v. Experian Data Corporation

District Court, S.D. California · Jun 4, 2025

To qualify for IFP status, “an affidavit is sufficient which states 21 that one cannot because of his poverty pay or give security for the costs . . . and still be 22 able to provide himself and dependents with the necessities … “Because the UCL is written in the disjunctive, it 2 establishes three varieties of unfair competition—acts or practices which are unlawful, or 3 unfair, or fraudulent.” Letizia v. Facebook Inc., 267 F.