Williams v. Horvath

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that Cal. Govt.Code § 911.2 does not apply to claims brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because such application would constitute an impediment to the exercise of a federal right
• “While there may be considerable overlap between the two statutes in given circumstances, the purposes underlying them are distinct.”
• civil rights plaintiff need not allege compliance with Tort Claims Act when filing 1983 action
• “The federal remedy is 14 supplementary to the state remedy, and the latter need not be first sought and 15 refused before the federal one is invoked.”
• “The federal remedy is 14 supplementary to the state remedy, and the latter need not be first sought and 15 refused before the federal one is invoked.”
• “The 9 California Tort Claims Act “confine[s] potential governmental liability to rigidly delineated 10 circumstances: immunity is waived only if the various requirements of the act are satisfied.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).