Parviz Karim-Panahi v. Los Angeles Police Department

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a claim dismissed for lack of 2 ||ripeness should have been dismissed without prejudice
• holding that 24 plaintiff’s pendent state law tort claims against both the individual and public entity 25 defendants are barred unless he presented them in compliance with Government 26 Claims Act before filing suit
• holding that 6 plaintiff’s pendent state law tort claims against both the individual and public entity 7 defendants are barred unless he presented them in compliance with Government 8 Claims Act before filing suit
• holding that 9 plaintiff’s pendent state law tort claims against both the individual and public entity 10 defendants are barred unless he presented them in compliance with Government 11 Claims Act before filing suit
• holding that supplemental state law tort claims alleged in a § 1983 suit 11 against both the individual and public entity defendants may be dismissed if the plaintiff 12 “fails to allege compliance with California tort claims procedures” before filing suit
• holding a mere allegation of conspiracy, without 24 factual specificity, is insufficient to state a claim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).