Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
658 results
1.09s
District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 16, 2023
ECF No. 1 at 14 ¶ 6.50. 7 Plaintiffs argue that a “conspiracy and manufacturing of justifications” occurred 8 that “clearly deprive[d] Mr. … Washington courts have consistently rejected 1 invitations to establish a cause of action for damages based upon constitutional 2 violations . . .
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · Oct 2, 2023
The party appealing the ALJ’s decision generally 17 bears the burden of establishing that it was harmed. Shinseki v. … Lewis 14 is not qualified to give an opinion. Tr. 990.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · Feb 22, 2024
Singh described Plaintiff’s condition as “very straightforward” and found that 4 Plaintiff “very clearly has signs and symptoms consistent with neurogenic thoracic 5 outlet syndrome.” Tr. 630. Dr. … Thus, the record does not establish 3 the frequency required by the Listing “despite adherence to treatment.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownHernandez, o/b/o A R v. Commissioner of Social Security
District Court, E.D. Washington · Sep 16, 2019
The party appealing the ALJ’s 7 decision generally bears the burden of establishing that it was harmed. … Id. 10 In May of 2014, Plaintiff’s elementary school determined he no longer 11 qualified for special education services. Tr. 307.
Cited 0 timesUnknownFortress Secure Solutions LLC v. AlarmSIM LLC
District Court, E.D. Washington · Dec 5, 2019
Carroll is not sufficiently qualified to offer 6 expert opinion evidence on the 2G-to-3G transition. While Mr. … “It is well-established … that expert testimony concerning an 5 ultimate issue is not per se improper.” Elsayed Mukhtar v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · May 8, 2024
To qualify as a severe impairment, the medical 13 evidence must establish that the impairment would have more than a minimal 14 15 … Conclusion 2 Plaintiff fails to establish that the ALJ erred.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 6, 2023
However, further 3 proceedings are necessary because significant questions of fact remain, and 4 disability is not clearly established.100 On remand, the ALJ shall conduct the 5 disability evaluation … Conclusion 12 Plaintiff establishes the ALJ erred.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · Jul 22, 2021
The Court will not comb a litigant’s 3 exhibits in search of a claim not clearly and concisely presented in the complaint. 4 Plaintiff also seeks to amend his complaint. ECF No. 19. … Plaintiff makes no assertion that he has 17 been denied vaccination(s) for COVID-19. 18 Rather, Plaintiff states that he is 70 years-old with a “weak immune system,” 19 his metabolism
Cited 0 timesUnknownPacific Aerospace & Electronics, Inc. v. Taylor
295 F. Supp. 2d 1188 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Jun 20, 2003
customer project information, purchasing history, detailed information about customer’s needs, technical project details, and the *1201 identities of individual contact people with whom Taylor and Petri dealt with at PAE qualify … law imposes a duty not to use trade secrets in competition with a former employer. 21 The Employment Agreement and the Invention and Confidential Information Agreement, signed by PAE employees, including Taylor and Petri, clearly
Cited 30 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · Feb 24, 2022
Step Two: Plaintiff establishes consequential error. 6 Plaintiff argues the ALJ erred by failing to find that his bilateral … including his upper extremity, knee, and lumbar limitations,73 and/or 2) elicit 4 testimony from a medical expert qualified
Cited 0 timesUnknownTurner v. Officers of the Mid Valley Bank
712 F. Supp. 1489 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Aug 24, 1988
Under this analysis, plaintiffs are clearly not creditors of Mid Valley Bank, and therefore lack standing to assert other creditors’ rights to have a preference set aside. … FDIC IMMUNITY Plaintiffs’ amended complaint alleges a civil rights violation against the FDIC under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (CtRec. 30, pg. 24) due to the lack of notice or a meaningful opportunity to be heard regarding the sale
Cited 1 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · Aug 10, 2020
medical sources are licensed physicians, licensed or certified psychologists, licensed 17 optometrists, licensed podiatrists, qualified … rheumatoid arthritis, and took Humera, which treats Plaintiff’s RA by decreasing 7 the response of his immune
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · Aug 4, 2022
“Thus, 9 applying our normal standard of review to the requirements of step two, [the 10 Court] must determine whether the ALJ had substantial evidence to find that the 11 medical evidence clearly established that … The vocational expert’s testimony will 6 qualify as substantial evidence if it is reliable. Embrey v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · Oct 14, 2025
For this 17 source, qualified means that the speech-language 18 pathologist … Brobst clearly identified himself as a Marriage and 10 11 Family Therapy “Intern” both when he examined Plaintiff in 2021 and 12 2023
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · Sep 16, 2025
An impairment that manifests 15 only some of the criteria, no matter how severely, does not qualify. … Plaintiff bears the burden of 18 establishing he meets a listing.
Cited 0 timesUnknownShreves v. Frontier Rail Corporation
District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 23, 2021
The 10 party claiming a privilege bears the burden of establishing the applicable privilege. 11 Id. … The 3 work-product doctrine ‘is not a privilege but a qualified immunity protecting from 4 discovery documents and tangible things prepared by a party or his representative 5 in anticipation of litigation.’” Id.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 4, 2024
Regardless of whether the Court’s bare- 6 bones analysis of the mandamus claim qualifies as a manifest error of law, the 7 Court clarifies its prior analysis of the mandamus claim.7 The Court will not, 8 however, amend … Language 9 When analyzing the last sentence of § 1182(a)(9)(B)(v), the Court in the 10 Dismissal Order stated: 11 Clearly
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 4, 2024
Regardless of whether the Court’s bare- 6 bones analysis of the mandamus claim qualifies as a manifest error of law, the 7 Court clarifies its prior analysis of the mandamus claim.7 The Court will not, 8 however, amend … Language 9 When analyzing the last sentence of § 1182(a)(9)(B)(v), the Court in the 10 Dismissal Order stated: 11 Clearly
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 4, 2024
Regardless of whether the Court’s bare- 6 bones analysis of the mandamus claim qualifies as a manifest error of law, the 7 Court clarifies its prior analysis of the mandamus claim.7 The Court will not, 8 however, amend … Language 9 When analyzing the last sentence of § 1182(a)(9)(B)(v), the Court in the 10 Dismissal Order stated: 11 Clearly
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 4, 2024
Regardless of whether the Court’s bare- 6 bones analysis of the mandamus claim qualifies as a manifest error of law, the 7 Court clarifies its prior analysis of the mandamus claim.7 The Court will not, 8 however, amend … Language 9 When analyzing the last sentence of § 1182(a)(9)(B)(v), the Court in the 10 Dismissal Order stated: 11 Clearly
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna