14 California opinions name it 1 courts 1990–2024 6 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
West v. Atkinsgreen2 sentences2022“To state a claim under [title 42 United States Code section] 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.” (West v. Atkins (1988) 487 U.S. 42, 48 .) “ ‘State courts look to federal law to determine what conduct will support an action under [title 42 United States Code] 26 section 1983.’ ” (Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angeles (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1455, 1472 .) “[A]lthough California state law may create a property intere 2022“To state a claim under [section] 1983, the plaintiff must allege a violation of his constitutional rights and show that the defendant’s actions were taken under color of state law.” (Gritchen v. Collier (9th Cir. 2001) 254 F.3d 807, 812 .) A defendant acts “under color of law” by exercising “power ‘possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because the wrongdoer is clothed with the authority of state law.’” (West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 49 .) “Action under color of state law normally consists of action taken by a public agency or officer.” (Taylor v. First Wyo. | 3 | 6 |
Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angelesgreen2 sentences2024Gogadze argues he can also assert causes of action under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 (section 1983) for violations of due process and for takings. “‘To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and 23 laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.’” (Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angeles (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1455, 1472 .) Gogadze states that his “proposed 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim is predicated on the DTSC’s imposition of the lien without due process of la 2024(Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angeles (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1455, 1470 .) “‘To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.’ [Citation.] ‘“State courts look to federal law to determine what conduct will support an action under section 1983. [Citation.]”’ [Citation.] ‘The threshold inquiry [in analyzing a section 1983 6 claim] is whether the evidence establishes that appellants have been deprived of a | 2 | 7 |
Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.green2 sentences2017Governing law “Title 42 United States Code section 1983 provides in relevant part: ‘Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State . . . 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 secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress . . . ” (Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angeles (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1455, 1472 2017Governing law “Title 42 United States Code section 1983 provides in relevant part: ‘Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State . . . 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 secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress . . . ” (Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angeles (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1455, 1472 | 2 | 3 |
Will v. Michigan Department of State Policegreen2 sentences2017Governing law “Title 42 United States Code section 1983 provides in relevant part: ‘Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State . . . 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 secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress . . . ” (Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angeles (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1455, 1472 2017Governing law “Title 42 United States Code section 1983 provides in relevant part: ‘Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State . . . 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 secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress . . . ” (Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angeles (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1455, 1472 | 2 | 2 |
McMillian v. Monroe Countygreen2 sentences2017Governing law “Title 42 United States Code section 1983 provides in relevant part: ‘Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State . . . 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 secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress . . . ” (Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angeles (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1455, 1472 2017Governing law “Title 42 United States Code section 1983 provides in relevant part: ‘Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State . . . 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 secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress . . . ” (Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angeles (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1455, 1472 | 2 | 2 |
Venegas v. County of Los Angelesgreen2 sentences2017Governing law “Title 42 United States Code section 1983 provides in relevant part: ‘Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State . . . 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 secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress . . . ” (Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angeles (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1455, 1472 2017Governing law “Title 42 United States Code section 1983 provides in relevant part: ‘Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State . . . 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 secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress . . . ” (Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angeles (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1455, 1472 | 2 | 2 |
Pearson v. Callahangreen2 sentences2017(See Saucier v. Katz (2001) 533 U.S. 194 , 201 [ 150 L.Ed.2d 272 , 121 S.Ct. 2151 ] (Saucier), overruled on other grounds in Pearson v. Callahan (2009) 555 U.S. 223, 236 [ 172 L.Ed.2d 565 , 129 S.Ct. 808 ] (Pearson).) “In resolving questions of qualified immunity at summary judgment, courts engage in a two-pronged inquiry.” (Tolan v. Cotton (2014) 572 U.S. _ , _ [ 188 L.Ed.2d 895 , 134 S.Ct. 1861, 1865 ].) “First, ‘[t]aken in the light most favorable to the party asserting the injury, do the facts alleged show the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right’ [Citation.] ‘If no constituti 2017(See Saucier v. Katz (2001) 533 U.S. 194 , 201 [ 150 L.Ed.2d 272 , 121 S.Ct. 2151 ] (Saucier), overruled on other grounds in Pearson v. Callahan (2009) 555 U.S. 223, 236 [ 172 L.Ed.2d 565 , 129 S.Ct. 808 ] (Pearson).) “In resolving questions of qualified immunity at summary judgment, courts engage in a two-pronged inquiry.” (Tolan v. Cotton (2014) 572 U.S. _ , _ [ 188 L.Ed.2d 895 , 134 S.Ct. 1861, 1865 ].) “First, ‘[t]aken in the light most favorable to the party asserting the injury, do the facts alleged show the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right’ [Citation.] ‘If no constituti | 1 | 2 |
Mendoza v. City of West Covinagreen2 sentences2017Governing law “Title 42 United States Code section 1983 provides in relevant part: ‘Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State . . . 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 secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress . . . ” (Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angeles (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1455, 1472 2017Governing law “Title 42 United States Code section 1983 provides in relevant part: ‘Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State . . . 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 secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress . . . ” (Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angeles (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1455, 1472 | 1 | 2 |
Pierce v. San Mateo County Sheriff's Departmentgreen2 sentences2017Governing law “Title 42 United States Code section 1983 provides in relevant part: ‘Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State . . . 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 secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress . . . ” (Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angeles (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1455, 1472 2017Governing law “Title 42 United States Code section 1983 provides in relevant part: ‘Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State . . . 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 secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress . . . ” (Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angeles (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1455, 1472 | 1 | 2 |
Golden Gate Water Ski Club v. County of Contra Costagreen1 sentence2024(Martinez v. City of Clovis (2023) 90 Cal.App.5th 193 , 254; Rubin v. Padilla (2015) 233 Cal.App.4th 1128, 1144 ; Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angeles, supra, 211 Cal.App.4th at p. 1471 .) We “accept as true all allegations of material fact and must construe those facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.” (Resnick v. Hayes (9th Cir. 2000) 213 F.3d 443, 447 .) “A plaintiff seeking recovery under section 1983 must plead more than constitutional ‘buzzwords’ to survive demurrer. [Citation.] The plaintiff must allege specific and nonconclusory facts showing the defendant’s acts deprive | 1 | 1 |
McAllister v. Los Angeles Unified School Districtgreen1 sentence2024(See, e.g., McAllister v. Los Angeles Unified School Dist. (2013) 216 Cal.App.4th 1198, 1207 [“a state, an entity acting as an ‘arm of the state,’ or a state official sued in his official capacity may not be considered a ‘person’ who may be liable under section 1983”].) Gogadze asserts that such an argument elevates “form over substance.” We agree with defendants that DTSC, a state agency, cannot be liable under section 1983.6 We decline to consider the new proposed grounds for liability asserted for the first time in Gogadze’s reply brief on appeal. | 1 | 1 |
David Litmon, Jr. v. Kamala Harrisgreen1 sentence2024(Martinez v. City of Clovis (2023) 90 Cal.App.5th 193 , 254; Rubin v. Padilla (2015) 233 Cal.App.4th 1128, 1144 ; Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angeles, supra, 211 Cal.App.4th at p. 1471 .) We “accept as true all allegations of material fact and must construe those facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.” (Resnick v. Hayes (9th Cir. 2000) 213 F.3d 443, 447 .) “A plaintiff seeking recovery under section 1983 must plead more than constitutional ‘buzzwords’ to survive demurrer. [Citation.] The plaintiff must allege specific and nonconclusory facts showing the defendant’s acts deprive | 1 | 1 |
Gonzales v. Raichgreen1 sentence2022(United States v. Jeffers (1951) 342 U.S. 48, 52-53 .) “An object is contraband per se if its possession, without more, constitutes a crime; or in other words, if there is no legal purpose to which the object could be put.” (United States v. Harrell (9th Cir. 2008) 530 F.3d 1051, 1057 .) Under the federal Controlled Substances Act, title 21 United States Code section 801 et seq., it is illegal for any private person to possess marijuana. ( 21 U.S.C. §§ 812 (c), 841(a)(1), 844(a); see also Gonzales v. Raich (2005) 545 U.S. 1, 27 [the federal Controlled Substances Act “designates marijuana as co | 1 | 1 |
The Kind and Compassionate v. City of Long Beach CA2/8green1 sentence2022(United States v. Jeffers (1951) 342 U.S. 48, 52-53 .) “An object is contraband per se if its possession, without more, constitutes a crime; or in other words, if there is no legal purpose to which the object could be put.” (United States v. Harrell (9th Cir. 2008) 530 F.3d 1051, 1057 .) Under the federal Controlled Substances Act, title 21 United States Code section 801 et seq., it is illegal for any private person to possess marijuana. ( 21 U.S.C. §§ 812 (c), 841(a)(1), 844(a); see also Gonzales v. Raich (2005) 545 U.S. 1, 27 [the federal Controlled Substances Act “designates marijuana as co | 1 | 1 |
| Weaver v. State of Californiagreen | 1 | 1 |
| Diana Pepper Sevigny v. Andrew F. Dicksey, Individually, and the Town of Carolina Beach, (Two Cases)green | 1 | 1 |
| No. 97-55579green | 1 | 1 |
| Josephina Duchesne as Administratrix of the Estate of Pauline Perez v. Jule M. Sugarmangreen | 1 | 1 |
| Rogers v. County of San Joaquingreen | 1 | 1 |
| Bullock v. City and County of San Franciscogreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Julian v. Mission Community Hospital
green
2 sentences2023(West v. Atkins (1988) 487 U.S. 42, 48 ; Julian v. Mission Community Hospital (2017) 11 Cal.App.5th 360, 384 .) Both Regina’s section 1983 claim and his cause of action for declaratory relief are premised on the allegation that section 28220, subdivision (f)(4), violates 10 the Second Amendment on its face and as applied to him. 2020Section 1983 Section 1983 provides: “Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State . . . subjects, or causes to be subjected, any . . . person . . . to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress . . . .” To state a claim under section 1983, “ ‘ “a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and must show that the alle | 2 | 2020–2023 |
Donald Saucier v. Elliot M. Katz and in Defense of Animals
red
2 sentences2017(See Saucier v. Katz (2001) 533 U.S. 194 , 201 [ 150 L.Ed.2d 272 , 121 S.Ct. 2151 ] (Saucier), overruled on other grounds in Pearson v. Callahan (2009) 555 U.S. 223, 236 [ 172 L.Ed.2d 565 , 129 S.Ct. 808 ] (Pearson).) “In resolving questions of qualified immunity at summary judgment, courts engage in a two-pronged inquiry.” (Tolan v. Cotton (2014) 572 U.S. _ , _ [ 188 L.Ed.2d 895 , 134 S.Ct. 1861, 1865 ].) “First, ‘[t]aken in the light most favorable to the party asserting the injury, do the facts alleged show the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right’ [Citation.] ‘If no constituti 2017(See Saucier v. Katz (2001) 533 U.S. 194 , 201 [ 150 L.Ed.2d 272 , 121 S.Ct. 2151 ] (Saucier), overruled on other grounds in Pearson v. Callahan (2009) 555 U.S. 223, 236 [ 172 L.Ed.2d 565 , 129 S.Ct. 808 ] (Pearson).) “In resolving questions of qualified immunity at summary judgment, courts engage in a two-pronged inquiry.” (Tolan v. Cotton (2014) 572 U.S. _ , _ [ 188 L.Ed.2d 895 , 134 S.Ct. 1861, 1865 ].) “First, ‘[t]aken in the light most favorable to the party asserting the injury, do the facts alleged show the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right’ [Citation.] ‘If no constituti | 2 | 2017–2017 |
Tolan v. Cotton
green
2 sentences2017(See Saucier v. Katz (2001) 533 U.S. 194 , 201 [ 150 L.Ed.2d 272 , 121 S.Ct. 2151 ] (Saucier), overruled on other grounds in Pearson v. Callahan (2009) 555 U.S. 223, 236 [ 172 L.Ed.2d 565 , 129 S.Ct. 808 ] (Pearson).) “In resolving questions of qualified immunity at summary judgment, courts engage in a two-pronged inquiry.” (Tolan v. Cotton (2014) 572 U.S. _ , _ [ 188 L.Ed.2d 895 , 134 S.Ct. 1861, 1865 ].) “First, ‘[t]aken in the light most favorable to the party asserting the injury, do the facts alleged show the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right’ [Citation.] ‘If no constituti 2017(See Saucier v. Katz (2001) 533 U.S. 194 , 201 [ 150 L.Ed.2d 272 , 121 S.Ct. 2151 ] (Saucier), overruled on other grounds in Pearson v. Callahan (2009) 555 U.S. 223, 236 [ 172 L.Ed.2d 565 , 129 S.Ct. 808 ] (Pearson).) “In resolving questions of qualified immunity at summary judgment, courts engage in a two-pronged inquiry.” (Tolan v. Cotton (2014) 572 U.S. _ , _ [ 188 L.Ed.2d 895 , 134 S.Ct. 1861, 1865 ].) “First, ‘[t]aken in the light most favorable to the party asserting the injury, do the facts alleged show the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right’ [Citation.] ‘If no constituti | 2 | 2017–2017 |
Breneric Associates v. City of Del Mar
green
1 sentence2024(Martinez v. City of Clovis (2023) 90 Cal.App.5th 193 , 254; Rubin v. Padilla (2015) 233 Cal.App.4th 1128, 1144 ; Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angeles, supra, 211 Cal.App.4th at p. 1471 .) We “accept as true all allegations of material fact and must construe those facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.” (Resnick v. Hayes (9th Cir. 2000) 213 F.3d 443, 447 .) “A plaintiff seeking recovery under section 1983 must plead more than constitutional ‘buzzwords’ to survive demurrer. [Citation.] The plaintiff must allege specific and nonconclusory facts showing the defendant’s acts deprive | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Herman Resnick v. Warden Hayes Lt. Ernst Officer Myers (Dho) Counselor Aune Officer Wade
green
1 sentence2024(Martinez v. City of Clovis (2023) 90 Cal.App.5th 193 , 254; Rubin v. Padilla (2015) 233 Cal.App.4th 1128, 1144 ; Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angeles, supra, 211 Cal.App.4th at p. 1471 .) We “accept as true all allegations of material fact and must construe those facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.” (Resnick v. Hayes (9th Cir. 2000) 213 F.3d 443, 447 .) “A plaintiff seeking recovery under section 1983 must plead more than constitutional ‘buzzwords’ to survive demurrer. [Citation.] The plaintiff must allege specific and nonconclusory facts showing the defendant’s acts deprive | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Rubin v. Padilla
green
1 sentence2024(Martinez v. City of Clovis (2023) 90 Cal.App.5th 193 , 254; Rubin v. Padilla (2015) 233 Cal.App.4th 1128, 1144 ; Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angeles, supra, 211 Cal.App.4th at p. 1471 .) We “accept as true all allegations of material fact and must construe those facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.” (Resnick v. Hayes (9th Cir. 2000) 213 F.3d 443, 447 .) “A plaintiff seeking recovery under section 1983 must plead more than constitutional ‘buzzwords’ to survive demurrer. [Citation.] The plaintiff must allege specific and nonconclusory facts showing the defendant’s acts deprive | 1 | 2024–2024 |
United States v. Jeffers
green
1 sentence2022(United States v. Jeffers (1951) 342 U.S. 48, 52-53 .) “An object is contraband per se if its possession, without more, constitutes a crime; or in other words, if there is no legal purpose to which the object could be put.” (United States v. Harrell (9th Cir. 2008) 530 F.3d 1051, 1057 .) Under the federal Controlled Substances Act, title 21 United States Code section 801 et seq., it is illegal for any private person to possess marijuana. ( 21 U.S.C. §§ 812 (c), 841(a)(1), 844(a); see also Gonzales v. Raich (2005) 545 U.S. 1, 27 [the federal Controlled Substances Act “designates marijuana as co | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Little v. Gore
green
1 sentence2022“To state a claim under [title 42 United States Code section] 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.” (West v. Atkins (1988) 487 U.S. 42, 48 .) “ ‘State courts look to federal law to determine what conduct will support an action under [title 42 United States Code] 26 section 1983.’ ” (Arce v. Childrens Hospital Los Angeles (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1455, 1472 .) “[A]lthough California state law may create a property intere | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Taylor v. First Wyoming Bank
green
1 sentence2022Bank, N.A. (9th Cir. 1983) 707 F.2d 388 , 389.) But under certain circumstances, a private entity like Koinonia may be liable under section 1983 as a “state actor.” (Franklin v. Fox (9th Cir. 2002) 312 F.3d 423 , 17 441.) “The Supreme Court has developed four different tests that ‘aid us in identifying state action: “(1) public function; (2) joint action; (3) governmental compulsion or coercion; and (4) governmental nexus.”’” (Pasadena Republican Club v. Western Justice Center (9th Cir. 2012) 985 F.3d 1161, 1167 .) The SAC does not clearly identify which test M.M. relies on to support her cont | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Pasadena Republican Club v. Western Justice Center
green
1 sentence2022Bank, N.A. (9th Cir. 1983) 707 F.2d 388 , 389.) But under certain circumstances, a private entity like Koinonia may be liable under section 1983 as a “state actor.” (Franklin v. Fox (9th Cir. 2002) 312 F.3d 423 , 17 441.) “The Supreme Court has developed four different tests that ‘aid us in identifying state action: “(1) public function; (2) joint action; (3) governmental compulsion or coercion; and (4) governmental nexus.”’” (Pasadena Republican Club v. Western Justice Center (9th Cir. 2012) 985 F.3d 1161, 1167 .) The SAC does not clearly identify which test M.M. relies on to support her cont | 1 | 2022–2022 |
United States v. Harrell
green
1 sentence2022(United States v. Jeffers (1951) 342 U.S. 48, 52-53 .) “An object is contraband per se if its possession, without more, constitutes a crime; or in other words, if there is no legal purpose to which the object could be put.” (United States v. Harrell (9th Cir. 2008) 530 F.3d 1051, 1057 .) Under the federal Controlled Substances Act, title 21 United States Code section 801 et seq., it is illegal for any private person to possess marijuana. ( 21 U.S.C. §§ 812 (c), 841(a)(1), 844(a); see also Gonzales v. Raich (2005) 545 U.S. 1, 27 [the federal Controlled Substances Act “designates marijuana as co | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Myron S. Gritchen v. Gordon W. Collier
green
1 sentence2022“To state a claim under [section] 1983, the plaintiff must allege a violation of his constitutional rights and show that the defendant’s actions were taken under color of state law.” (Gritchen v. Collier (9th Cir. 2001) 254 F.3d 807, 812 .) A defendant acts “under color of law” by exercising “power ‘possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because the wrongdoer is clothed with the authority of state law.’” (West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 49 .) “Action under color of state law normally consists of action taken by a public agency or officer.” (Taylor v. First Wyo. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
George Thomas Franklin v. Jim Fox Martin Murray Robert Morse Bryan Cassandro John Cuneo, Sergeant Eileen Franklin-Lipsker
green
1 sentence2022Bank, N.A. (9th Cir. 1983) 707 F.2d 388 , 389.) But under certain circumstances, a private entity like Koinonia may be liable under section 1983 as a “state actor.” (Franklin v. Fox (9th Cir. 2002) 312 F.3d 423 , 17 441.) “The Supreme Court has developed four different tests that ‘aid us in identifying state action: “(1) public function; (2) joint action; (3) governmental compulsion or coercion; and (4) governmental nexus.”’” (Pasadena Republican Club v. Western Justice Center (9th Cir. 2012) 985 F.3d 1161, 1167 .) The SAC does not clearly identify which test M.M. relies on to support her cont | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Bach v. County of Butte
green
1 sentence2020(Arce, at pp. 1472–1473; Berman v. City of Daly City 3 The statute provides in relevant part: “Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory . . . 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 secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress . . . .” Because “an action under section 1983 is based o | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Ashcroft v. Iqbal
green
1 sentence2020(Arce, at pp. 1472–1473; Berman v. City of Daly City 3 The statute provides in relevant part: “Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory . . . 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 secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress . . . .” Because “an action under section 1983 is based o | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Berman v. City of Daly City
green
1 sentence2020(Arce, at pp. 1472–1473; Berman v. City of Daly City 3 The statute provides in relevant part: “Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory . . . 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 secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress . . . .” Because “an action under section 1983 is based o | 1 | 2020–2020 |
| Daniels v. Williams green | 1 | 2020–2020 |
| Stewart Organization, Inc. v. Ricoh Corp. green | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.