Younger V. Harris

166 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• McCURRY v. Allen
  606 F.2d 795· 8th Cir.· 1979-10-01 ·cited 20×
  The court held that collateral estoppel does not bar a § 1983 action for search and seizure claims when federal habeas corpus relief is unavailable, and that the district court should not have granted summary judgment without considering all claims.
• Miller v. Granados
  529 F.2d 393· 5th Cir.· 1976-03-25 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the complaint based on abstention and that the complaint sufficiently alleged a tie-in arrangement violating the Sherman Act.
• Jaroslav Sedivy v. Elliot L. Richardson
  485 F.2d 1115· 3d Cir.· 1973-09-26 ·cited 20×
  The court concurred with the result but expressed concern that the jurisdictional amount requirement of 28 U.S.C. § 1331 was not met, suggesting this issue requires further consideration.
• Hilary Davis v. Page
  640 F.2d 599· 5th Cir.· 1981-03-23 ·cited 18×
  The dissenting judge argues that federal habeas corpus relief is an inappropriate vehicle for addressing state child custody disputes, and that federal courts should defer to state courts in such matters.
• United States v. Kuehn
  562 F.2d 427· 7th Cir.· 1977-09-19 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the United States Attorney lacked standing to seek an injunction against a state prosecution based on a federal grant of immunity, and that collateral estoppel barred the witness's intervention claim after the state court denied his motion to dismiss.
• Becker v. Thompson
  463 F.2d 1338· 5th Cir.· 1972-07-20 ·cited 18×
• Cooley v. Endictor
  458 F.2d 513· 5th Cir.· 1972-04-03 ·cited 17×
• Winston v. Child. & Youth Servs. OF Del. Cnty.
  948 F.2d 1380· 3d Cir.· 1991-11-07 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' request for declaratory relief regarding visitation policies was not moot, and the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act's "reasonable efforts" clause creates enforceable rights, though a specific minimum visitation period was not establish
• Barnette v. Honorable James H. Evans
  673 F.2d 1250· 11th Cir.· 1982-04-26 ·cited 16×
  A bankruptcy court cannot enjoin a state criminal prosecution for theft by deception, even if a conviction would mandate restitution of a debt that might be dischargeable in bankruptcy.
• Duncan v. Leander H. Perez, Jr.
  445 F.2d 557· 5th Cir.· 1971-06-14 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district judge accurately applied the criteria established in Younger v. Harris for granting federal injunctive relief against state prosecutions.
• Hadley v. Werner
  753 F.2d 514· 6th Cir.· 1985-01-28 ·cited 15×
  The court held that a claim challenging the validity of a conviction, even if framed as a damages action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, must first be pursued through a habeas corpus petition to establish the illegality of confinement.
• Cobb Coin Co. v. Unidentified
  525 F. Supp. 186· S.D. Fla.· 1981-10-02 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the State of Florida's actions in threatening arrests and prosecution constituted bad faith harassment, justifying federal injunctive relief despite the Younger v. Harris doctrine, and that the court possessed admiralty jurisdiction over the salvage dispute.
• Rosenthal v. Carr
  614 F.2d 1219· 9th Cir.· 1980-01-28 ·cited 14×
  Federal courts are barred by the abstention doctrine from enjoining pending state attorney disciplinary proceedings absent exceptional circumstances.
• Blouin v. Hon. Nanette Dembitz
  489 F.2d 488· 2d Cir.· 1973-12-13 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the § 1983 action, holding that federal courts should abstain from deciding issues of state judicial administration that are best left to state courts.
• ROY v. Jones
  484 F.2d 96· 3d Cir.· 1973-05-22 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the district court's dismissal, finding the case barred by res judicata, a ground different from the district court's abstention reasoning.
• Gordon v. Honorable Moon Landrieu
  442 F.2d 926· 5th Cir.· 1971-03-17 ·cited 14×
• Deaver v. Seymour
  822 F.2d 66· D.C. Cir.· 1987-06-15 ·cited 13×
  The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Michael Deaver's request for a preliminary injunction to prevent independent counsel from seeking an indictment.
• Helfant v. Kugler
  500 F.2d 1188· 3d Cir.· 1974-07-08 ·cited 13×
  The dissenting judge argues that federal courts should not interfere in ongoing state criminal proceedings absent bad faith, harassment, or truly extraordinary circumstances, which are not present here.
• Harris v. Luckey
  918 F.2d 888· 11th Cir.· 1990-11-16 ·cited 12×
  The district court correctly applied the law of the case doctrine to deny a motion to dismiss based on new grounds not previously raised or ruled upon.
• United States ex rel. Agnes Scranton v. The State OF NEW York
  532 F.2d 292· 2d Cir.· 1976-03-15 ·cited 12×
  A federal court should not grant habeas corpus relief to a state prisoner who has not exhausted all available state remedies, even if the prisoner claims a speedy trial violation.
• Juluke v. Hodel
  811 F.2d 1553· D.C. Cir.· 1987-02-17 ·cited 11×
• James P. Kartell, M.D. v. Blue Shield OF Mass., Inc.
  592 F.2d 1191· 1st Cir.· 1979-02-02 ·cited 11×
  The court held that abstention was appropriate pending resolution of complex state law questions by Massachusetts courts, as these questions were critical to the federal antitrust claims and involved substantial public policy concerns.
• Burrus v. Turnbo
  743 F.2d 693· 9th Cir.· 1984-09-25 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD) mandates dismissal with prejudice if a receiving state returns a prisoner to the sending state before trial, regardless of the reason for the return or subsequent appellate reinstatement of the indictment.
• Lydon v. Justices OF the Boston Mun. Court
  698 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1982-12-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a defendant's election of a two-tier trial system does not constitute a waiver of the right to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence presented at the first-tier trial.
• Dolph Briscoe v. Levi
  535 F.2d 1259· D.C. Cir.· 1976-04-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court had narrow jurisdiction to review whether the Director of the Census properly applied the Voting Rights Act, but not to review the computations themselves. The court affirmed the district court's decision that the Director's determinations w
• Glenn v. Reubin O'D. Askew
  513 F.2d 61· 5th Cir.· 1975-05-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the appellee failed to exhaust his state court remedies before seeking federal habeas corpus relief.
• Cmty. Action Grp. v. City OF Columbus
  473 F.2d 966· 5th Cir.· 1973-02-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court's findings of fact were not clearly erroneous and that federal courts should not intervene in pending state court proceedings absent exceptional circumstances.
• Kinney v. Harlow F. Lenon
  447 F.2d 596· 9th Cir.· 1971-08-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that federal courts should not enjoin state court proceedings, even for juveniles, due to principles of comity and federalism, and that a claim for a declaratory judgment is also subject to these equitable principles.
• Livingston v. Garmire
  442 F.2d 1322· 5th Cir.· 1971-05-10 ·cited 9×
  A federal court cannot enjoin a pending state criminal prosecution unless the plaintiff proves great and immediate irreparable injury, and mere vagueness or overbreadth of a statute is insufficient without bad faith or harassment.
• Blue Cross & Blue Shield OF Md., Inc. v. Weiner
  868 F.2d 1550· 11th Cir.· 1989-04-05 ·cited 8×
  The district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine because BCBS-Maryland's claims required reviewing the state court's judgment, and thus the denial of the preliminary injunction and abstention are affirmed, but the case is remanded to dismiss
• Davis v. Hon. Thomas C. Crush
  862 F.2d 84· 6th Cir.· 1988-11-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in imposing Rule 11 sanctions because the plaintiffs' civil rights complaint did not necessarily reflect a lack of reasonable inquiry into the facts or law.
• Grant v. Meyer
  741 F.2d 1210· 10th Cir.· 1984-07-31 ·cited 8×
  A state statute prohibiting payment of initiative petition circulators does not violate the First Amendment because it restricts only generalized support for a political thought, not personal speech, and serves a compelling state interest in protecting the integrity of the initia
• In re Davis v. Sheldon
  691 F.2d 176· 3d Cir.· 1982-10-21 ·cited 8×
  A federal court should not enjoin pending state criminal prosecutions impacting bankruptcy proceedings when the state has a legitimate interest and the defendants have not demonstrated bad faith or irreparable harm.
• Cassidy v. Va. Carolina Veneer Corp.
  652 F.2d 380· 4th Cir.· 1981-06-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appeal must be dismissed as premature because the district court's order regarding attorneys' fees was not a final judgment.
• Leigh v. McGUIRE
  613 F.2d 380· 2d Cir.· 1979-12-19 ·cited 8×
  The statute of limitations for a § 1983 action should be tolled during the pendency of intertwined state criminal and Article 78 proceedings when federal claims were necessarily raised in those state actions.
• Victoriano Rodriguez Diaz v. Stathis
  576 F.2d 9· 1st Cir.· 1978-05-22 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of claims by plaintiffs involved in pending state criminal proceedings and claims by a plaintiff in a state civil suit, but directed the dismissal of the civil suit plaintiff's claims to be without prejudice.
• Foster v. Zeeko
  540 F.2d 1310· 7th Cir.· 1976-08-18 ·cited 8×
• Rhodes v. City OF Chicago in Tr. For the USE OF Schs.
  516 F.2d 1373· 7th Cir.· 1975-04-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court properly granted summary judgment because the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act does not create private rights of action, and the state court provided an adequate forum for the plaintiffs' claims.
• Citizens FOR A Better Env't, Inc. v. Nassau Cnty.
  488 F.2d 1353· 2d Cir.· 1973-11-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction because the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a likelihood of prevailing on the merits or irreparable harm, given the unresolved state law questions regarding the plaintiff orga
• Morgan v. Wofford
  472 F.2d 822· 5th Cir.· 1973-01-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court should determine if the appellant disputed the restitution amount and, if so, grant relief conditioned on the state providing due process.
• Anderson v. Nemetz
  474 F.2d 814· 9th Cir.· 1973-01-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appellant had standing to challenge the Arizona vagrancy statute and that the Younger abstention doctrine did not apply because no state prosecution was pending.
• Milner v. Colonel R. H. Burson
  470 F.2d 870· 5th Cir.· 1972-12-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that federal intervention in state criminal prosecutions is improper unless bad faith or harassment is shown, and the district court erred by not applying this standard.
• Scott v. Hill
  449 F.2d 634· 6th Cir.· 1971-10-07 ·cited 8×
  A federal court should not enjoin state criminal proceedings absent bad faith, but a claim for declaratory and injunctive relief regarding state court reapportionment requires a three-judge court.
• United States v. Navarro
  441 F.2d 409· 5th Cir.· 1971-04-21 ·cited 8×
  The district court's order properly complied with the prior mandate, allowing limited testimony from federal officials regarding the chain of custody and identification of contraband, and allowing testimony from state officials.
• Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp. v. State
  929 F.2d 1532· 11th Cir.· 1991-04-11 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a claim of federal preemption does not fall within the exceptions to the Anti-Injunction Act, and thus the district court erred in enjoining the state prosecution based on preemption alone.
• Benson v. Superior Court Dep't OF the Trial Court OF Mass. & Francis X. Bellotti
  663 F.2d 355· 1st Cir.· 1981-11-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the double jeopardy clause does not bar prosecution for conspiracy after acquittal on substantive arson charges, and that claims regarding relitigation of facts are not yet ripe for federal review.
• Chris Simopoulos, M.D. v. Va. State Bd. OF Med.
  644 F.2d 321· 4th Cir.· 1981-03-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the action under the Younger abstention doctrine, as federal courts should not interfere with pending state proceedings.
• Bedrosian v. Mintz
  518 F.2d 396· 2d Cir.· 1975-06-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the action because federal courts should not interfere with state court proceedings absent substantial irreparable injury, and the state's refusal to appoint out-of-state counsel was a rational exercise of discretion not v
• Devlin v. Sosbe
  465 F.2d 169· 7th Cir.· 1972-07-31 ·cited 6×
  The court held that while the district court had jurisdiction, it properly declined to exercise it by abstaining, allowing state courts to interpret the ordinance.
• Padilla v. Hon. Harold J. Ackerman
  460 F.2d 477· 9th Cir.· 1972-05-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that federal courts should not enjoin pending state criminal proceedings absent special circumstances, even in civil rights actions, and that declaratory relief is subject to the same standard.