Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
21-16873
|
Chaudhry v. Aragon
Plaintiff doctor, who alleged that an inaccurate State report harmed his employment interests, failed to establish the requisite causation element of his "stigma-plus" Section 1983 due process claim. |
Civil Rights |
|
G. Katzmann | May 24, 2023 |
21-36052
|
Roberts v. Springfield Utility Board
Public employer did not violate employee's First Amendment rights by barring discussion of a workplace investigation with other employees because the restriction did not limit his ability to speak about matters of public concern. |
Civil Rights |
|
M. Smith | May 15, 2023 |
21-442
|
Reed v. Goertz
For prisoners pursuing state post-conviction DNA testing through state courts, the statute of limitations for Section 1983 procedural due process claims start to run when the state litigation ends. |
Civil Rights |
|
B. Kavanaugh | Apr. 20, 2023 |
21-16709
|
Murguia v. Langdon
Where state actors left 10-month old twins in a more dangerous situation than the one in which they found them, the state-created danger exception applied. |
Civil Rights |
|
C. Bea | Mar. 15, 2023 |
21-5628
|
Amended Opinion: Mejia v. Miller
Expansion of implied cause of action to new context was improper where the court could not be certain of the systemwide consequences of such an expansion. |
Civil Rights |
|
N. Freudenthal | Mar. 3, 2023 |
21-35975
|
Sinclair v. City of Seattle
Mother could not sue Seattle for loss of companionship with special needs son killed in Capital Hill Occupied Protest because the actual danger created by the City was not particularized to the decedent. |
Civil Rights |
|
R. Nelson | Mar. 2, 2023 |
22-35338
|
Sullivan v. University of Washington
Disclosure of committee appointment letters would not violate right to expressive association because the committee was not a group of individuals who banded together to advance shared goals or beliefs. |
Civil Rights |
|
S. Ikuta | Feb. 21, 2023 |
21-16929
|
Duarte v. City of Stockton
Plaintiff's excessive force and false arrest claims were not barred by the Heck doctrine because his "no contest" plea was not entered as an actual conviction. |
Civil Rights |
|
K. Cardone | Feb. 17, 2023 |
22-35183
|
Pettibone v. Russell
No Bivens cause of action existed where special factors, including an alternative remedial process, indicated constitutional cause of action should not be expanded to include the underlying context. |
Civil Rights |
|
E. Miller | Feb. 3, 2023 |
21-35400
|
Dodge v. Evergreen School District #114
Triable issues existed as to teacher's First Amendment retaliation claim against school principal when she told him that he would need a union representative the next time she saw him wearing MAGA hat. |
Civil Rights |
|
D. Forrest | Dec. 30, 2022 |
G059917
|
Casey N. v. County of Orange
Substantial evidence supported the jury's finding that statements made in social workers' reports, alleging mother was coaching daughter to claim sexual abuse by father, were deliberately false or reckless. |
Civil Rights |
|
K. O'Leary | Dec. 27, 2022 |
21-36029
|
Kleiser v. Chavez
The private search exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement is not foreclosed simply because cell site location information is involved. |
Civil Rights |
|
R. Tallman | Dec. 12, 2022 |
B318061
|
Villalobos v. City of Santa Maria
No reasonable juror could find that police officers were negligent or had acted unreasonably in a shooting that resulted in the death of an individual who refused to drop a knife. |
Civil Rights |
|
K. Yegan | Nov. 17, 2022 |
21-56282
|
Mejia v. Miller
Expansion of implied cause of action to new context was improper where the court could not be certain of the systemwide consequences of such an expansion. |
Civil Rights |
|
N. Freudenthal | Nov. 15, 2022 |
21-55855
|
Mobilize the Message LLC v. Bonta
Political campaign services' First Amendment rights were not violated by Assembly Bill 5 as the bill's application would only incidentally affect professions involving speech. |
Civil Rights |
|
J. Ericksen | Oct. 12, 2022 |
E075246
|
County of San Bernardino v. Mancini
San Bernardino ordinance preventing cannabis sales did not create a substantial burden on religious group that consumes cannabis as sacraments because selling cannabis was not a religious activity of the group. |
Civil Rights |
|
C. Codrington | Oct. 7, 2022 |
20-50052
|
Amended Opinion: U.S. v. Rosenow
Yahoo and Facebook's search of child pornographer's data was not a Fourth Amendment violation as they had legitimate, independent reasons to do so. |
Civil Rights |
|
W. Hayes | Oct. 4, 2022 |
21-35815
|
Tingley v. Ferguson
Neither the First nor Fourteenth Amendments prohibited the state of Washington from stopping the practice of conversion therapy on minors by state-licensed healthcare providers. |
Civil Rights |
|
R. Gould | Sep. 7, 2022 |
21-55478
|
Vanegas v. City of Pasadena
No Fourth Amendment violation where probable cause existed to arrest defendant even though the basis for probable cause was not what defendant was arrested for. |
Civil Rights |
|
P. Bumatay | Sep. 1, 2022 |
20-15872
|
Demarest v. City of Vallejo
City's systematic addition of driver's license checks to an otherwise valid sobriety checkpoint was objectively reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. |
Civil Rights |
|
D. Collins | Aug. 17, 2022 |
20-16774
|
Sabra v. Maricopa County Community College District
Arizona community college teacher was entitled to qualified immunity since plaintiffs' Free Exercise claim was not clearly established at the time of the alleged Islamophobic quiz. |
Civil Rights |
|
R. Clifton | Aug. 11, 2022 |
21-35173
|
Pierce v. Jacobsen
Banning out-of-state petition circulators from petition initiative process was an overly broad and unconstitutional regulation that imposed a severe restriction on a core form of political speech. |
Civil Rights |
|
J. Tunheim | Aug. 11, 2022 |
21-16007
|
Hernandez v. City of Phoenix
Phoenix police officer's personal Facebook posts denigrating Muslims and Islam warranted First Amendment protection because they qualified as speech on matters of public concern. |
Civil Rights |
|
P. Watford | Aug. 8, 2022 |
20-55622
|
Amended Opinion: J.K.J. v. City of San Diego
A plaintiff failed to plausibly allege that an officer violated a detainee's constitutional right to adequate medical treatment. |
Civil Rights |
|
D. Fisher | Aug. 3, 2022 |
21-15970
|
Yoshikawa v. Seguirant
Regulatory enforcement based on technical violations may serve as basis of an equal protection claim when regulation would not have been enforced in the same manner but for plaintiff's race. |
Civil Rights |
|
J. Bybee | Jul. 26, 2022 |
19-15222
|
Lemos v. County of Sonoma
Plaintiff's action for excessive force against Sonoma Sheriff's Deputy was not necessarily barred by her resisting arrest violation because liability for the actions may be based on two separate events. |
Civil Rights |
|
E. Miller | Jul. 20, 2022 |
21-15731
|
David v. Kaulukukui
Parent and child's constitutional right to familial association is violated when a state official interferes with a parent's lawful custody through judicial deception. |
Civil Rights |
|
D. Forrest | Jun. 28, 2022 |
21-15295
|
Apache Stronghold v. U.S.
Governmental transfer of land sacred to Apaches, to a mining company, did not violate the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. |
Civil Rights |
|
C. Bea | Jun. 27, 2022 |
19-56205
|
Richards v. County of San Bernardino
Plaintiff must only show a reasonable probability that alleged evidence fabrication in his murder case would lead to a different result since it implicated his right to a fair trial. |
Civil Rights |
|
R. Tallman | Jun. 27, 2022 |
21-499
|
Vega v. Tekoh
A violation of Miranda rules does not provide a basis for a 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 claim. |
Civil Rights |
|
S. Alito | Jun. 24, 2022 |