Oriental Financial Group, Inc. v. Cooperativa De Ahorro Y Crédito Oriental

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “the requirements of Monell do apply to 16 suits against private entities under § 1983”
• stating that a Section 1983 plaintiff has the burden to plead 16 and prove state action by a private defendant
• finding that the ALJ erred in ignoring and failing to discuss medical 23 opinion where opinion was “not a conclusory statement” about ability to work but rather “an 24 assessment, based on objective medical evidence”
• holding an infringer’s longstanding use of a trademark did not defeat progressive encroachment where the infringer failed to produce evidence of “how or in what degree [the trademark] was disseminated” in the relevant geographic market for the relevant timeframe
• explaining it is error to assess an incomplete RFC that 14 ignores “significant and probative evidence”
• extending the “official policy” requirement for municipal 20 liability under Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658, 691 (1978), to private entities 21 acting under color of law

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).