Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Coleman v. Brown [2] [3] (Previously Coleman v. Wilson) (), is a federal class action civil rights lawsuit under the Civil Rights Act of 1871, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 alleging unconstitutional mental health care by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR).
Plata v. Newsom, Docket No. 4:01-cv-01351-JST (), is a federal class action civil rights lawsuit alleging that the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation's (CDCR) medical services are inadequate and violate the Eighth Amendment, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
Chief among these is the Ninth Circuit's unique rules concerning the composition of an en banc court. In other circuits, en banc courts are composed of all active circuit judges, plus (depending on the rules of the particular court) any senior judges who took part in the original panel decision. By contrast, in the Ninth Circuit it is ...
Fair Housing Council of San Fernando Valley v. Roommates.com, LLC, 521 F.3d 1157 (9th Cir. 2008), [1] is a case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, sitting en banc, held that immunity under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) did not apply to an interactive online operator whose questionnaire violated the Fair Housing Act.
Coleman v. Schwarzenegger, docket no. 2:90-cv-00520-LKK-JFM (), is a federal class action civil rights lawsuit under the Civil Rights Act of 1871, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 alleging unconstitutional mental health care by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR).
Trump's request for an en banc hearing is his final appellate option before possibly turning to the Supreme Court. Trump asks appeals court to reconsider overturning $5 million E. Jean Carroll ...
On July 12, 2010, the case was remanded by the en banc panel to the three judge panel for rehearing following McDonald v. Chicago, and oral arguments were heard by a panel of the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court on October 19, 2010. [10] On May 2, 2011, the court released its decision. [11]
In May of 2023, CDCR served Kuzmicz with a notice of adverse action and fined him 10% of his pay for a period of two years. “In Mr. Kuzmicz’s over 20 year career with the CDCR, he had never ...