Case law

Klein v. Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance

806 F. Supp. 2d 1120 · District Court, S.D. California · Jun 29, 2011

Court’s order only required briefing on the discovery allowed under the structural conflict of interest and the fiduciary exception to the attorney client privilege, then purportedly reserve their right to assert other immunities … Once the attorney-client privilege has been established, the party seeking to pierce it bears the burden of showing an exception exists.

United States v. Alvarez-Jimenez

151 F. Supp. 3d 1119 · District Court, S.D. California · Nov 23, 2015

Plaintiff United States contends that record establishes that the statute of conviction in SU13CR1097 was Ga.Code Ann. (OCGA) § 16-5-21(a)(2). … The Court concludes that the Government has carried its burden to clearly demonstrate the prior statute of conviction in SU13CR1097 was OCGA § 16-521(a)(2). See United States v.

Gawel v. Radius Health, Inc.

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

The federal work product 12 doctrine was established in Hickman v. … to be qualified as work 19 20 product.

Collins v. Wolf

591 B.R. 752 · District Court, S.D. California · Sep 10, 2018

Accordingly, the bankruptcy court did not clearly err in finding no valid transmutation from community to separate property. III. … Because he cannot establish hostility, Charles' adverse possession claim must fail. VII.

Moore v. Hill

District Court, S.D. California · Jun 5, 2025

As such, a showing of negligence or 24 inadvertence is insufficient to establish an Eighth Amendment violation. … Plaintiff’s allegations do not clearly 9 establish when Dr. Martin became aware of Dr.

Lopez v. Fluidra USA LLC

District Court, S.D. California · Jul 13, 2021

Twombly, 550 18 U.S. 544 (2007), the Supreme Court established a more stringent standard of review for 19 12(b)(6) motions.2 To survive a motion to dismiss under this standard, “a complaint must 20 contain sufficient … “The privilege ‘immunizes defendants from virtually any tort 14 liability (including claims for fraud), with the sole exception of causes of action for 15 malicious prosecution.’” Id. (quoting Olsen v.

Arellano v. Guldseth

District Court, S.D. California · Oct 30, 2020

Oct. 3, 2006) (“Although there is authority establishing liability 5 for an individual who fails to intervene under § 1983, there is no authority for imposing 6 liability . . . under the Bane or Ralph Acts for failure … Section 1915(b)(2), with ALL 10 PAYMENTS TO BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED BY THE NAME AND NUMBER 11 ASSIGNED TO THIS ACTION; 12 3.

Davis v. City of National City

District Court, S.D. California · Nov 19, 2020

Proc. § 377.32 to establish 23 she is a successor in interest. … The Bane Act “clearly 16 provides for a personal cause of action for the victim of a hate crime,” and “is limited to 17 plaintiffs who themselves have been the subject of violence or threats.” Id.

Matthew v. Palomares

District Court, S.D. California · Jul 7, 2025

(i) is 14 || frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) 15 ||seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 16 || 1915(e)(2) … Garcia, 791 F.3d 1104, 1115 (9th Cir. 2015) (“This case law merely confirms the 15 || well-established rule that a § 1983 claim cannot be maintained against defendants who act 16 || under color of tribal rather than state

United States v. Finn

127 F. Supp. 158 · District Court, S.D. California · Nov 5, 1954

Clearly, then, the restrictions as to disposal and use in Regulation § 8304.11(b)(2), (3) and those set forth in the executed Form 65 are contradictory and cannot stand together. … Sovereign immunity, both as to liability and as to suit, cf. Hopkins v.

McKinley v. Miller

District Court, S.D. California · Oct 11, 2023

Qualified Immunity 23 Lastly, Defendant argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity. (Def.’s Mot., 24 ECF No. 149-2 at 18-21.) … The Court, however, need not address Defendant’s qualified 25 immunity argument because it finds that Plaintiff’s constitutional claims fail on the 26 merits.

Johnston v. Allison

District Court, S.D. California · Sep 21, 2020

Defendants contend that Plaintiff fails to state a 3 claim upon which relief may be granted or, alternatively, that Plaintiff’s claims are barred 4 by qualified immunity. (See generally id. at 2.) … immunity.

Anh Van Thai v. County of Los Angeles

District Court, S.D. California · Jul 21, 2022

Such cases implicate an additional layer of liability analysis on the question of 13 qualified immunity for police officers. … Defendants Villasenor and Sanchez 28 must produce documents and respond to interrogatories sufficient to establish their 1 current financial condition.

Nelson v. Sorrento Tower Apartments

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

“To bring a disparate treatment claim, the plaintiff must first 18 establish a prima facie case. … However, from the beginning of the 21 process, Defendants were aware that Plaintiff was living in HUD-funded subsidized 22 housing in Minneapolis, and he would not have qualified for such housing if that were 23 true

Jones

District Court, S.D. California · Dec 8, 2025

Id. 14 “To help staunch a ‘flood of non-meritorious’ prisoner litigation, the Prison 15 Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PLRA) established what has become known as the three- 16 strikes … Pulido, 928 F.3d 1147, 7 1152 (9th Cir. 2019) (“[T]o qualify as a strike for § 1915(g), a case as a whole, not just 8 some of its individual claims, must be dismissed for a qualifying reason.”)

Carney v. City of San Diego

District Court, S.D. California · Jul 9, 2021

. § 451 defines “agency” for the purposes of Title 19 28 to include “any department, independent establishment, commission, administration, 20 authority, board or bureau of the United States or any corporation in which … Although Defendants clearly had a relationship with the 24 Navy concerning the Village of Serra Mesa Housing District and the housing units thereon, 25 Defendants have failed to show how the specific facts and claims

Altamirano v. Kijakazi

District Court, S.D. California · Apr 13, 2023

A complaint should be dismissed if it is (1) “frivolous or malicious;” (2) 24 “fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted;” or (3) “seeks monetary relief against a 25 defendant who is immune from such relief … Plaintiff clearly states his 14 || disagreement with the determination made by the Social Security Administration by alleging the 15 || decision was not supported by substantial evidence because she “did not resolve

In Re Remec Incorporated Securities Litigation

702 F. Supp. 2d 1202 · District Court, S.D. California · Apr 21, 2010

That such omissions are common however does not immunize them from being misleading. … The evidence clearly shows that Ernst & Young did not resign on the ground that REMEC’s financial statements contained “an adverse opinion or a disclaimer of opinion, or was qualified or modified as to uncertainty, audit

Palacios v. Lewis

District Court, S.D. California · Aug 21, 2023

“To establish § 1983 liability, a plaintiff must show both (1) a deprivation of a 24 right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and (2) that the deprivation 25 was committed by a person acting under … All payments SHALL be clearly identified by the name and number 6 assigned to this action.

Moreno v. Vi-Jon, Inc.

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

“immediately next to the 16 representations it qualifies”); Sponchiado v. … The opening summary of the TFM clearly states: “the FDA is 8 issuing a notice of proposed rulemaking in the form of an amended tentative final 9 monograph that would establish conditions under which over-the-counter