Case law

Stevenson v. Rominger

909 F. Supp. 779 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Oct 19, 1995

The party opposing summary judgment must go beyond the pleadings to designate specific facts establishing a genuine issue for trial. Celotex Corp. v. … If it is determined that she turned down a valid offer for fair market value from the government, then her property would not qualify under this section.

Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation v. Anderson

761 F. Supp. 2d 1101 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Jan 3, 2011

This was a traditional section 1983 suit for unlawful arrest, clearly distinguishable from our case. Id. at 516 n. 8. Here, state action was taken directly against Mr. … any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities

Parke

District Court, E.D. Washington · Nov 13, 2025

Discrimination under the ADA and WLAD includes a claim 19 for disparate treatment of a qualified disabled individual. 42 U.S.C. § 12112; 20 RCW 49.60.180. … Additionally, Elves does not 12 allege facts that support qualified individuals were denied any benefit or program 13 or that it was because of their disability.

Alexander v. City of Richland

District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 5, 2020

The “Amended Brief” was filed more than 21 days after service of 8 Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, and therefore cannot qualify as an amendment as a 9 matter of course to the initial Complaint. Fed. R. Civ. … As the Court noted in another Order, Plaintiffs’ 1 Complaint “consists of approximately 20 pages of legally incoherent grievances 2 that do not clearly correspond to the defendants named or the relief sought.”

Newkirk v. ConAgra Foods, Inc.

727 F. Supp. 2d 1006 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Jul 2, 2010

If a plaintiff is not able to establish general causation, it is unnecessary to consider whether the plaintiff can establish specific causation. See Raynor v. … Pue did not establish a safe level of microwave popcorn vapor exposure; Dr. Pue did not establish Mr. Newkirk’s actual exposure level; and Dr.

Henricksen v. ConocoPhillips Co.

605 F. Supp. 2d 1142 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Feb 11, 2009

Once a court makes the “preliminary” determination under Fed.R.Evid. 104(a) that a witness qualifies as an expert, the focus shifts to that witness’s proffered testimony. … that gas station attendant studies have tended to show positive associations (though there are some inconsistent studies), that gasoline contains benzene, but that benzene has been associated with the risk of AML “most clearly

Farr v. Blodgett

810 F. Supp. 1485 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Jan 22, 1993

Clearly, segregation can include a stint in IMU or some lesser form of restrictive confinement which does not take place in IMU, but which nevertheless involves removal from the general population. 6 . … A direct threat to a correctional officer would probably qualify as a serious infraction under 137-28-030(506) — "Threatening another with bodily harm or with any offense against his/her person.” 9 .

Downing v. Ekstrom

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jan 25, 2024

Conduct Advisory Opinion 103 (“[r]eview of a complaint against a judicial 15 colleague where the litigation is patently frivolous or judicial immunity … Aug. 25, 2011) (holding that a pro se 13 plaintiff’s claims that provided no private right of action were frivolous when 14 “precedent clearly forecloses private rights of action on such claims.”); Gilbert v. 15 U.S

Adams v. Saul

District Court, E.D. Washington · Aug 28, 2020

However, the ALJ clearly stated that 20 “[i]t does not appear that Dr. … Jordan does not qualify as an 17 acceptable medical source. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1502, 416.902. Instead, she qualifies 18 as an other source. Id.

Wild Fish Conservancy v. Kempthorne

613 F. Supp. 2d 1209 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Apr 30, 2009

Although the FWS has established critical habitat for the bull trout, it does not include Icicle Creek. B. … As for take, Defendants argue that the ITS clearly quantified the anticipated amount and extent of take. Ct. Rec. 129 at 32.

Ziegler v. Ziegler

28 F. Supp. 2d 601 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Nov 5, 1998

To meet the standing requirement of Article III, Supreme Court cases have established three elements. … Defendant first argues that the title of the Act clearly establishes a gender classification. The Violence Against Women Act of 1994 is the short title for a number of provisions. 108 Stat.1902, Part 3 (1995).

Community Ass'n for Restoration of the Environment v. Henry Bosma Dairy

65 F. Supp. 2d 1129 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Jul 29, 1999

These harms are sufficient to establish an injury in fact. … On its very face, the DWMP clearly indicates, on page 13, that wastewa-ter from the truck wash is being discharged to J.D. 26.6.

Bailey v. Astrue

725 F. Supp. 2d 1244 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Jun 30, 2010

“Information from other sources cannot establish the existence of a medically determinable impairment. ... … In this case, the evidence does not clearly indicate that plaintiff is disabled.

Blair v. Soap Lake Natural Spa & Resort LLC

District Court, E.D. Washington · May 7, 2020

“To 1 qualify as a ‘bona fide’ dispute, it must be ‘fairly debatable’ as to whether an 2 employment relationship exists or whether the wages must be paid.” Id. … Plaintiff Sharp disagrees, 16 arguing the evidence clearly establishes Defendants agreed to pay him a $5000.00 17 bonus to begin work immediately and a $1000.00 payment to assist in his relocation, 18 of which he contends

Navajo Nation v. SUPERIOR COURT OF STATE OF WASH.

47 F. Supp. 2d 1233 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 31, 1999

Generally, district courts are unwilling to grant a motion to dismiss on the pleadings “unless the movant clearly establishes that no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and that he is entitled to judgment as a … They simply do not qualify as “Indian custodians” as that term is used in the ICWA and therefore have no rights as such. The Strongs never had legal or physical custody of K.H.

Platteter v. O'Malley

District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 19, 2024

The initial burden 15 is met once the claimant establishes that a physical or mental impairment prevents 16 them from engaging in their previous occupation. Meanel, 172 F.3d at 1113. … However, the Ninth Circuit has held that the Social Security 8 regulations revised in March 2017 are “clearly irreconcilable with [past Ninth 9 Circuit] caselaw according special deference to the opinions of treating

Guyott

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jan 15, 2026

P. 65(b) states that a court may issue a temporary restraining 1 order (TRO) without written or oral notice to the adverse party only if: (A) specific 2 facts in an affidavit or a verified complaint clearly show that … To meet his burden, Plaintiff must first establish that he has 6 a likelihood of success on the merits of his claim against Defendants – that 7 Defendants violated Title II of the ADA.

I.V. v. Wenatchee Sch. Dist. No. 246

342 F. Supp. 3d 1083 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Sep 19, 2018

The moving party bears the "burden of establishing the nonexistence of a 'genuine issue.' " Celotex Corp. v. Catrett , 477 U.S. 317 , 330, 106 S.Ct. 2548 , 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986). … An actor is deliberately indifferent when they "make 'an official decision ... not to remedy the violation' " and their response is "clearly unreasonable in light of the known circumstances".

Erickson v. Huber

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jun 28, 2022

She is clearly not alleging discrimination 2 against an employer, thus, her claims do not arise under Title I. … It is also unclear 8 whether Plaintiff is a qualified individual under the ADA. As such, Plaintiff has 9 failed to state an ADA claim upon which relief may be granted.

Chapple v. Ganger

851 F. Supp. 1481 · District Court, E.D. Washington · May 12, 1994

A credible link must be established between the reasoning and the conclusion. … An expert may be "qualified" to render an opinion, but the methodology may be suspect.