§Why CasetextPricing

JANKEY v. LEE

Appellant, Les Jankey, Opening Brief on the Merits

148 Cited authorities

  1. Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife

    504 U.S. 555 (1992)   Cited 27,840 times   138 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"

  2. Hensley v. Eckerhart

    461 U.S. 424 (1983)   Cited 21,574 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding a civil-rights plaintiff can recover attorney's fees for claims that "involve a common core of facts or will be based on related legal theories," even if only one of those claims arises under a fee-shifting statute

  3. Hishon v. King Spalding

    467 U.S. 69 (1984)   Cited 12,436 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding Title VII applies to selection for non-employee positions if consideration for that position can be regarded as one of "terms, conditions, or privileges of employment" of a covered job

  4. Blum v. Stenson

    465 U.S. 886 (1984)   Cited 8,817 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that fee shifting is “to be calculated according to the prevailing market rates in the relevant community, regardless of whether plaintiff is represented by private or nonprofit counsel”

  5. Martinez v. Ylst

    951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991)   Cited 31,034 times
    Holding that failure to file a timely objection may waive the right to appeal the district court's order

  6. Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc.

    510 U.S. 517 (1994)   Cited 2,824 times   30 Legal Analyses
    Holding that under the Copyright Act fee-shifting statute, 17 U.S.C. § 505, defendants and plaintiffs are to be treated the same, contrary to the Court's interpretation of § 1988

  7. Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr

    518 U.S. 470 (1996)   Cited 2,417 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the presence of a state-law damages remedy for violations of FDA requirements does not impose an additional requirement upon medical device manufacturers but "merely provides another reason for manufacturers to comply with . . . federal law"

  8. Missouri v. Jenkins

    491 U.S. 274 (1989)   Cited 2,324 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that reasonable attorney's fees includes the costs of paralegals' time

  9. Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n

    434 U.S. 412 (1978)   Cited 3,648 times   33 Legal Analyses
    Holding that for a defendant to recoup attorneys fees under § 706(k) of Title VII, a court must find that the plaintiff litigated his or her claim beyond the point where it became “frivolous, unreasonable, or groundless” or where plaintiff acted in bad faith

  10. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dept

    901 F.2d 696 (9th Cir. 1988)   Cited 15,995 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'"

  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 345,981 times   922 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 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 15   Cited 90,557 times   91 Legal Analyses
    Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint

  13. Section 12101 - Findings and purpose

    42 U.S.C. § 12101   Cited 23,323 times   65 Legal Analyses
    Finding a pattern of " unnecessary discrimination and prejudice" that "costs the United States billions of dollars in unnecessary expenses resulting from dependency and nonproductivity"

  14. Section 1988 - Proceedings in vindication of civil rights

    42 U.S.C. § 1988   Cited 21,794 times   43 Legal Analyses
    Finding that 28 U.S.C. § 1920 defines the term "costs" as used in Rule 54(d) and enumerates the expenses that a federal court may tax as a cost under the discretionary authority granted in Rule 54(d)

  15. Section 51 - Unruh Civil Rights Act

    Cal. Civ. Code § 51   Cited 4,614 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Incorporating ADA violations

  16. Section 904.1 - Appeal to court of appeal

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 904.1   Cited 4,407 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Setting forth "one final judgment rule" under which, generally speaking, a party may appeal only after a final judgment

  17. Section 12182 - Prohibition of discrimination by public accommodations

    42 U.S.C. § 12182   Cited 3,882 times   61 Legal Analyses
    Explaining that public accommodations cannot "directly or through contractual or other arrangements, utilize standards or criteria or methods of administration" that have the effect of discriminating on the basis of disability."

  18. Section 12181 - Definitions

    42 U.S.C. § 12181   Cited 3,451 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Including "grocery store" and "pharmac[ies]" whose operations "affect commerce" within the definition of "public accommodation"

  19. Section 12203 - Prohibition against retaliation and coercion

    42 U.S.C. § 12203   Cited 3,380 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting discrimination "against any individual because such individual has opposed any act or practice made unlawful by [the ADA] or because such individual made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing under [the ADA]"

  20. Section 12205 - Attorney's fees

    42 U.S.C. § 12205   Cited 1,583 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Permitting the court to allow costs to "the prevailing party"

  21. Section 1630.1 - Purpose, applicability, and construction

    29 C.F.R. § 1630.1   Cited 210 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Noting "broad scope of protection under the ADA" and that "question of whether an individual meets the definition of disability under this part should not demand extensive analysis"

  22. Rule 8.1115 - Citation of opinions

    Cal. R. 8.1115   Cited 73,846 times

    (a) Unpublished opinion Except as provided in (b), an opinion of a California Court of Appeal or superior court appellate division that is not certified for publication or ordered published must not be cited or relied on by a court or a party in any other action. (b)Exceptions An unpublished opinion may be cited or relied on: (1) When the opinion is relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel; or (2) When the opinion is relevant to a criminal or disciplinary

  23. Rule 8.278 - Costs on appeal

    Cal. R. 8.278   Cited 4,809 times

    (a)Award of costs (1) Except as provided in this rule, the party prevailing in the Court of Appeal in a civil case other than a juvenile case is entitled to costs on appeal. (2) The prevailing party is the respondent if the Court of Appeal affirms the judgment without modification or dismisses the appeal. The prevailing party is the appellant if the court reverses the judgment in its entirety. (3) If the Court of Appeal reverses the judgment in part or modifies it, or if there is more than one notice

  24. Rule 8.1110 - Partial publication

    Cal. R. 8.1110   Cited 2,327 times

    (a)Order for partial publication A majority of the rendering court may certify for publication any part of an opinion meeting a standard for publication under rule 8.1105. (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2007.) (b) Opinion contents The published part of the opinion must specify the part or parts not certified for publication. All material, factual and legal, including the disposition, that aids in the application or interpretation of the published part must be published. (c) Construction For

  25. Rule 8.1105 - Publication of appellate opinions

    Cal. R. 8.1105   Cited 2,089 times

    (a)Supreme Court All opinions of the Supreme Court are published in the Official Reports. (b)Courts of Appeal and appellate divisions Except as provided in (e), an opinion of a Court of Appeal or a superior court appellate division is published in the Official Reports if a majority of the rendering court certifies the opinion for publication before the decision is final in that court. (Subd (b) amended effective July 23, 2008; adopted effective April 1, 2007.) (c)Standards for certification An opinion

  26. Rule 8.500 - Petition for review

    Cal. R. 8.500   Cited 337 times

    (a)Right to file a petition, answer, or reply (1) A party may file a petition in the Supreme Court for review of any decision of the Court of Appeal, including any interlocutory order, except the denial of a transfer of a case within the appellate jurisdiction of the superior court. (2) A party may file an answer responding to the issues raised in the petition. In the answer, the party may ask the court to address additional issues if it grants review. (3) The petitioner may file a reply to the answer

  27. Rule 8.1125 - Requesting depublication of published opinions

    Cal. R. 8.1125   Cited 206 times

    (a) Request (1) Any person may request the Supreme Court to order that an opinion certified for publication not be published. (2) The request must not be made as part of a petition for review, but by a separate letter to the Supreme Court not exceeding 10 pages. (3) The request must concisely state the person's interest and the reason why the opinion should not be published. (4) The request must be delivered to the Supreme Court within 30 days after the decision is final in the Court of Appeal. (5)

  28. Rule 8.1120 - Requesting publication of unpublished opinions

    Cal. R. 8.1120   Cited 141 times

    (a) Request (1) Any person may request that an unpublished opinion be ordered published. (2) The request must be made by a letter to the court that rendered the opinion, concisely stating the person's interest and the reason why the opinion meets a standard for publication. (3) The request must be delivered to the rendering court within 20 days after the opinion is filed. (4) The request must be served on all parties. (b) Action by rendering court (1) If the rendering court does not or cannot grant