Case law

In Re Nucorp Energy Securities Litigation

661 F. Supp. 1403 · District Court, S.D. California · Apr 15, 1987

Clearly, however, the settlement did not accomplish this. … Laventhol involved an attempt, prior to trial, to extinguish a non-settling defendant’s right to contribution and its qualifying language must be considered in this context.

Hipschman v. County of San Diego

District Court, S.D. California · Apr 28, 2025

“To qualify for work-product 12 protection, documents must: (1) be prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial and (2) 13 be prepared by or for another party or by or for that other party’s representative.” … The Court does not find the ruling clearly erroneous or 23 contrary to law.

Reiger v. Price Waterhouse Coopers LLP

117 F. Supp. 2d 1003 · District Court, S.D. California · Oct 2, 2000

Using different initial assumptions and approaches, different sampling techniques, and the wisdom of 20-20 hindsight, few CPA audits [are] immune from criticism.” Id.; see also In re GlenFed, Inc. … Thus, violations of GAAP or GAAS, without more, may establish negligence but can never establish scienter under Rule 10b-5 and the Reform Act. See, e.g., Worlds of Wonder, 35 F.3d at 1426 ; Rothman, 220 F.3d at 98 .

Gilles v. The People of the State of California

District Court, S.D. California · Nov 1, 2019

Defendants further contend that 7 Officer Hickox is entitled to qualified immunity. Id. at 13. … Defendants 7 also contend that Officer Collins is entitled to qualified immunity. Id. at 13.

United States v. Security-First Nat. Bank

30 F. Supp. 113 · District Court, S.D. California · Nov 20, 1939

Clearly Congress, with complete propriety, may provide one lien to protect its rights pending the assessment of a tax, and another to enforce the collection thereof, once assessed. … No matter how unfortunate the result may seem through the refusal of the court to qualify the broad terms of a general statute, the task of legislation must not be assumed by the courts; Crooks v.

San Diego Cnty. Sch. Risk Mgmt. Joint Powers Auth. v. Liberty Ins. Corp.

339 F. Supp. 3d 1019 · District Court, S.D. California · Apr 16, 2018

This excess insurance applies to losses you have paid as a qualified self-insurer under the Workers Compensation Law for bodily injury by accident or bodily injury by disease including resulting death, provided: 1. … LEXIS 7201 (2000), arguing that this case established that excess insurance issued to a self-insurer was subject to Workers' Compensation Law.

Corbett v. PharmaCare U.S., Inc.

District Court, S.D. California · Jun 17, 2021

“Economic injury is clearly a sufficient basis for standing.” San 14 Diego Cnty. Gun Rights Committee v. Reno, 98 F.3d 1121, 1130 (9th Cir. 1996); 15 Debernardis v. … At the pleading stage, the plaintiff “must 19 ‘clearly . . . allege facts demonstrating’ each element.” Id.

Paramount Plastering, Inc. v. Local No. 2 of the Operative Plasterers & Cement Masons International Ass'n

195 F. Supp. 287 · District Court, S.D. California · Jun 5, 1961

defendants herein to have the said non-profit defendant corporation to act as trustee in the collection and disbursement of monies from employers in lieu and in place of the three trusts last hereinabove mentioned, without qualifying … To remove these dangers, specific standards were established to assure that welfare funds would be established only for purposes which Congress considered proper and expended only for the purposes for which they were established

Warn v. M/Y MARIDOME

961 F. Supp. 1357 · District Court, S.D. California · Mar 31, 1997

This clearly invokes the protections and benefits of U.S. laws. … They cannot implead the Greek government in the United States due to the bar of sovereign immunity. See Foreign Services Immunity Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1605 et seq.

Parks v. Ethicon, Inc.

District Court, S.D. California · Jan 24, 2022

Because the Protective Order 8 permitted materials to be designated “Confidential” if the material would qualify for a 9 protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), (see id. at 5 (citing Prot. 10 Order … Elliott’s compensation information does not currently 15 qualify for protection under Rule 26(c) nor does it have any additional level of protection 16 because it was designated as ‘Confidential’ under the MDL universal

MEDWAY v. Cate

756 F. Supp. 2d 1280 · District Court, S.D. California · Nov 17, 2010

Clearly established federal law “refers to the holdings, as opposed to the dicta, of [the Supreme] Court’s decisions as of the time of the relevant state-court decision.” Williams, 529 U.S. at 412 , 120 S.Ct. 1495 . … Newland, 467 F.3d 1139, 1152 (9th Cir.2006) (“[i]n general, Ninth Circuit precedent remains persuasive authority in determining what is clearly established federal law”).

Navarro v. Wolf

District Court, S.D. California · Mar 30, 2021

4 from suit as a sovereign unless it has “expressly waived immunity and consented to be 5 sued.” … Here, Plaintiff filed suit against the Acting Secretary 7 of the Department of Homeland Security, thereby implicating the sovereign immunity bar. 8 However, the FTCA provides a waiver of sovereign immunity, and

Hawkins v. San Diego County

District Court, S.D. California · Feb 16, 2021

In counts two and three, Dunsmore also alleges 9 that Defendants have “refused to establish and maintain access to services for individuals 10 with disabilities both physical and mental as qualified under the ADA . . … In count two, Hawkins claims Defendants have “failed and refused to 18 establish and maintain access to services for individuals with disabilities both physical and 19 mental as qualified under the ADA [Americans with

(PC) Bradford v. Khamooshian

District Court, S.D. California · Sep 17, 2019

Under this statute, the Court 24 must sua sponte dismiss a prisoner’s IFP complaint, or any portion of it, which is frivolous, 25 malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks damages from defendants who are immune. … The law clearly allows actions against supervisors under section 1983 10 as long as a sufficient causal connection is present and the plaintiff was deprived under 11 color of law of a federally secured right.”

Mascorro

District Court, S.D. California · Nov 17, 2025

While officers can rely upon 18 information from a witness to establish reasonable suspicion for a Terry stop, they cannot 19 establish probable cause solely on witness information. See Thomas v. … Cooley, 12 552 F.3d 1062, 1075 (9th Cir. 2009) (finding that speech by a citizen on matters of public 13 concern was a clearly established First Amendment right).

Lopez v. Hay

District Court, S.D. California · Jan 26, 2021

Shaw, 628 F.2d 297, 304 n.10 (5th Cir. 1980), it 10 appears that recent Fifth Circuit case law is moving away from a standard where delay or 11 stale evidence alone qualifies for a valid access-to-courts claim. … immunity issue 25 because it is unnecessary in dismissing the Fourth Cause of Action, and because it 26 implicates state law claims (“clearly

Whittle v. Saul

District Court, S.D. California · Aug 28, 2020

The Court must dismiss the complaint if it is frivolous or malicious, fails 5 to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a 6 defendant immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e … If Plaintiff 6 || files an amended pleading, she can at that time submit a renewed motion for IFP, 7 || provided that she believes she qualifies for IFP status under the requirements set forth 8 ||above.

Moore

District Court, S.D. California · Mar 26, 2026

is required to sua sponte 14 dismiss the case at any time it concludes the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state 15 a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant 16 immune … Apr. 24, 2025) (“[Plaintiff] does 4 not allege any facts that, if true, would establish that any defendant discriminated against 5 him on the basis of his disability.”); Olson v.

City of Carlsbad v. Shah

666 F. Supp. 2d 1159 · District Court, S.D. California · Oct 20, 2009

The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB” or “Board”) has further qualified what evidence a nonmoving party must present in order to defeat a motion for summary judgment based on lack of intent to use. … It clearly states at the top that it is not TTAB precedent. Thus, while it does affirm Commodore’ s proposition above, it can not legally be considered or cited in these proceedings.

Residential Energy Services Network, Inc. v. Building Science Institute, Ltd. Co., et al.

District Court, S.D. California · Nov 21, 2025

Nor 21 does BSI offer any authority that a previously abandoned trademark application would 22 qualify under those categories. (Id.; cf. … BSI has not met its burden to establish that the Court was “dead wrong” about 7 ||the agreement.