61 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 262,357 times   281 Legal Analyses
    Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint
  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 275,664 times   369 Legal Analyses
    Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing
  3. Univ. of Tex. Sw. Med. Ctr. v. Nassar

    570 U.S. 338 (2013)   Cited 5,398 times   78 Legal Analyses
    Holding that application of the " ‘because’ of" requirement of Title VII's antiretaliation provision requires proof of "but-for" causation
  4. Moss v. U.S. Secret Service

    572 F.3d 962 (9th Cir. 2009)   Cited 8,880 times
    Holding that the court lacked jurisdiction over the district court's deferral of the summary judgment motion
  5. Starr v. Baca

    652 F.3d 1202 (9th Cir. 2011)   Cited 5,465 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a series of investigative reports documenting systemic deficiencies in a jail put the defendant-supervisor on notice of the risk of the harm that befell the plaintiff
  6. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dept

    901 F.2d 696 (9th Cir. 1988)   Cited 16,342 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a cognizable gender discrimination claim could be brought by a female domestic violence victim where the victim alleged police denied protection and made misogynistic comments including that "he did not blame [the victim's] husband for hitting her, because of the way she was 'carrying on'"
  7. Guz v. Bechtel National, Inc.

    24 Cal.4th 317 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 3,296 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an implied covenant "cannot be endowed with an existence independent of its contractual underpinnings. It cannot impose substantive duties or limits on the contracting parties beyond those incorporated in the specific terms of their agreement."
  8. Whittlestone, Inc. v. Handi-Craft Co.

    618 F.3d 970 (9th Cir. 2010)   Cited 1,365 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b) is the appropriate means of disposing of an improper claim for relief
  9. Yanowitz v. L'Oreal USA Inc.

    36 Cal.4th 1028 (Cal. 2005)   Cited 1,564 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that to establish a "protected activity," an "employee's communications to the employer [must] sufficiently convey the employee's reasonable concerns that the employer has acted or is acting in an unlawful discriminatory manner."
  10. Western Min. Council v. Watt

    643 F.2d 618 (9th Cir. 1981)   Cited 2,907 times
    Holding the Court should not "assume the truth of legal conclusions merely because they are cast in the form of factual allegations"
  11. Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 12   Cited 356,694 times   945 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
  12. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 161,416 times   197 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
  13. Section 12102 - Definition of disability

    42 U.S.C. § 12102   Cited 11,070 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing ADA claim where plaintiff is "regarded as" disabled
  14. Section 3294 - When damages recoverable for sake of example and by way of punishment; employer liability for acts of employee; death from homicide

    Cal. Civ. Code § 3294   Cited 2,851 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Stating plaintiff may recover punitive damages "in addition to the actual damages"
  15. Section 12940 - Unlawful employment practices

    Cal. Gov. Code § 12940   Cited 996 times
    Prohibiting discrimination because of "sex, ... sexual orientation," etc.
  16. Section 3600 - Generally

    Cal. Lab. Code § 3600   Cited 908 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Noting that liability for compensation under California's Workers’ Compensation Act is "in lieu of any other liability whatsoever to any person "
  17. Section 2922 - Termination at will of either party

    Cal. Lab. Code § 2922   Cited 428 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Stating where an employment has no specified term, it "may be terminated at the will of either party on notice to the other."
  18. Section 12926 - Definitions in connection with unlawful practices

    Cal. Gov. Code § 12926   Cited 209 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Providing examples of "reasonable accommodation"
  19. Section 3200 - Workmen's compensation known as workers' compensation

    Cal. Lab. Code § 3200   Cited 209 times   2 Legal Analyses

    The Legislature hereby declares its intent that the term "workmen's compensation" shall hereafter also be known as "workers' compensation, " and that the "Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board" shall hereafter be known as the "Workers' Compensation Appeals Board." In furtherance of this policy it is the desire of the Legislature that references to the terms "workmen's compensation" and "Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board" in this code or elsewhere be changed to "workers' compensation" and "Workers'

  20. Section 11065 - Definitions

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 2 § 11065   Cited 71 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Defining essential and marginal functions
  21. Section 11019 - Terms, Conditions and Privileges of Employment

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 2 § 11019   Cited 35 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Defining harassment
  22. Section 11034 - Terms, Conditions, and Privileges of Employment

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 2 § 11034   Cited 2 times   2 Legal Analyses

    (a) Compensation. (1) Except as otherwise required or permitted by regulation, an employer or other covered entity shall not base the amount of compensation paid to an employee, in whole or in part, on the employee's sex. (2) Equal Compensation for Comparable Work. (Reserved.) (b) Fringe Benefits. (1) It is unlawful for an employer to condition the availability of fringe benefits upon an employee's sex, including gender identity and gender expression. (2) Insofar as an employment practice discriminates