Quackenbush v. Allstate Ins. Co.
From Conservapedia
In Quackenbush v. Allstate Ins. Co., 517 U.S. 706, 731 (1996), the U.S. Supreme Court held that "federal courts have the power to dismiss or remand cases based on abstention principles only where the relief being sought is equitable or otherwise discretionary. Because this was a damages action, we conclude that the District Court's remand order was an unwarranted application of the Burford doctrine."
By the time of this decision, the Fifth Circuit and Sixth Circuit had both held that Younger has no applicability to a claim for damages.[1]
References
- ↑ Thomas v. Texas State Bd. of Medical Examiners, 807 F. 2d 453, 457 (5th Cir. 1987).
