green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 5×
56.4 score
“hen a state criminal prosecution has begun, the younger rule directly bars a declaratory action" as well as a 1983 action for declaratory relief and damages "where such an action would have a substantially disruptive effect upon ongoing state criminal proceedings”
Treatment trajectory · 1986 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1986
2006
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7279, 97 Daily Journal D.A.R. 11,739 Phillip G. Martinez, Aka: Phillip Nmi Martinez Aka: Phillip Martinez v. Newport Beach City Newport Beach Pd M. McDermott Craig Robison, Phillip G. Martinez, Irvine, California, in Pro Per
But cf. Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448 (9th Cir.1986) (per curiam) (applying Younger to federal § 1983 damages claims pending disposition of criminal prosecution in state court). 5 Indeed, this court has stated that "[c]ivil-Younger abstention has been upheld only where a party seeks to invoke federal jurisdiction for the purpose of 'restraining state proceedings or invalidating a state law.' " Confederated Salish v. Simonich, 29 F.3d at 1405 , citing United States v. Adair, 723 F.2d 1394 , 1402 n. 5 (9th Cir.1983).
discussed
Cited "but see"
Martinez v. Newport Beach City
But cf. Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448 (9th Cir.1986) (per curiam) (applying Younger to federal § 1983 damages claims pending disposition of criminal prosecution in state court). 5 Indeed, this court has stated that “[cjivil-Younger abstention has been upheld only where a party seeks to invoke federal jurisdiction for the purpose of ‘restraining state proceedings or invalidating a state law.’” Confederated Salish v. Simonich, 29 F.3d at 1405 , citing United States v. Adair, 723 F.2d 1394 , 1402 n. 5 (9th Cir.1983).
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Delgadillo v. Fresno Police Department
when a state criminal prosecution has 6 begun the younger rule directly bars a declaratory judgment action" as well as a section 1983 7 action for damages "where such an action would have a substantially disruptive effect upon ongoing 8 state criminal proceedings.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
(PC) McLane v. Tollett
when a state criminal prosecution has begun the younger rule directly bars a declaratory judgment action" as well as a section 1983 action for damages "where such an action would have 24 a substantially disruptive effect upon ongoing state criminal proceedings.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
(PC) Lute v. Silva
when a state 27 criminal prosecution has begun, the younger rule directly bars a declaratory judgment action" as 1 have a substantially disruptive effect upon ongoing state criminal proceedings
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
(PC) McLane v. Tollett
when a state criminal prosecution has begun the younger rule directly bars a declaratory judgment action" as well as a section 1983 action for damages 25 "where such an action would have a substantially disruptive effect upon ongoing state criminal proceedings.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Hirt v. Jackson County
hen a state criminal prosecution has begun, the younger rule directly bars a declaratory action" as well as a 1983 action for declaratory relief and damages "where such an action would have a substantially disruptive effect upon ongoing state criminal proceedings
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Paleti Anikesi Veniale v. Samuel Steiner, et al.
Younger prohibits federal courts from directly enjoining state prosecutions, 11 401 U.S. at 45, and also from substantially interfering with ongoing state prosecutions by 12 entertaining claims that seek to enforce the rights of the criminal defendant in the state forum. 13 See Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986) (per curiam). 14 As such, Younger abstention is appropriate if four requirements are met: (1) a state- 15 initiated proceeding is ongoing; (2) the proceeding implicates important state interests; (3) there 16 is an adequate opportunity in the state proceedings to raise c…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Fields v. Hill
“Further, the Younger abstention doctrine bars 10 requests for declaratory and monetary relief for constitutional injuries arising out of a plaintiff’s 11 ongoing state criminal prosecution.” Id. (citing Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986)). 12 5.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Griggs v. Banuelos
“Further, the Younger abstention doctrine bars 10 requests for declaratory and monetary relief for constitutional injuries arising out of a plaintiff’s 11 ongoing state criminal prosecution.” Id. (citing Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986)). 12 C.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Ocampo v. Avila
“Further, the Younger abstention doctrine bars requests for declaratory and monetary relief 6 for constitutional injuries arising out of a plaintiff’s ongoing state criminal prosecution.” Id. (citing 7 Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986)). 8 C.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
DeVaughn v. Fresno Police Dept.
“Further, the Younger abstention doctrine bars 11 requests for declaratory and monetary relief for constitutional injuries arising out of a plaintiff’s 12 ongoing state criminal prosecution.” Id. (citing Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986)). 13 C.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Garcia v. Baskin
Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986) (abstaining from action seeking declaratory judgment and money damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Yellen v. State of Hawaii
Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
(PS) Peters v. Ervin
Abstention is 8 proper regardless of whether the applicant seeks declaratory relief, injunctive relief, or damages. 9 See Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986) (“When a state criminal prosecution has 10 begun, the Younger rule directly bars a declaratory judgment action” as well as a section 1983 11 action for declaratory relief and damages “where such an action would have a substantially 12 disruptive effect upon ongoing state criminal proceedings.”); Gilbertson v. Albright, 381 F.3d 13 965, 984 (9th Cir. 2004) (en banc) (Younger abstention applies to actions for damages a…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Crossett v. State of Idaho
Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986) (abstaining from action seeking declaratory judgment and money damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Searles Jr v. Yakima County of Washington State
Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Lopez v. Maningo
Mann v. Jett, 21 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
(PC) Pull v. Harbour Deputy Bailiff
Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 12 | 1986)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Scott v. DA Office of Stanislaus County
Cal. Mar. 15, 2019). 26 “Further, the Younger abstention doctrine bars requests for declaratory and monetary relief for 27 constitutional injuries arising out of a plaintiff's ongoing state criminal prosecution.” Id., citing 28 Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986). 1 5.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
(PC) Martin v. Gutierrez
Cal. Mar. 15, 2019). 15 “Further, the Younger abstention doctrine bars requests for declaratory and monetary relief for 16 constitutional injuries arising out of a plaintiff's ongoing state criminal prosecution.” Id., citing 17 Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986). 18 9.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Fawver v. Nye County Sheriff's Office
See Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 53-54 (1971); Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Scott v. DA Office of Stanislaus County
Cal. Mar. 15, 2019). 25 “Further, the Younger abstention doctrine bars requests for declaratory and monetary relief for 26 constitutional injuries arising out of a plaintiff's ongoing state criminal prosecution.” Id., citing 27 Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986). 28 1 E.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Williams v. The People of the State of California
“Further, the Younger abstention doctrine bars requests for 11 declaratory and monetary relief for constitutional injuries arising out of a plaintiff’s ongoing state 12 criminal prosecution.” Id., citing Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir.1986). 13 B.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
(PC) Martin v. Blea
“Absent extraordinary circumstances, 5 interests of comity and federalism instruct federal courts to abstain from exercising our 6 jurisdiction in certain circumstances when asked to enjoin ongoing state enforcement 7 proceedings.” Page v. King, 932 F.3d 898, 901 (9th Cir. 2019) (internal quotation marks & 8 citation omitted) “Further, the Younger abstention doctrine bars requests for declaratory and 9 monetary relief for constitutional injuries arising out of a plaintiff's ongoing state criminal 10 prosecution.” Id., citing Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
(PC) Martin v. Blea
“Absent extraordinary circumstances, 5 interests of comity and federalism instruct federal courts to abstain from exercising our 6 jurisdiction in certain circumstances when asked to enjoin ongoing state enforcement 7 proceedings.” Page v. King, 932 F.3d 898, 901 (9th Cir. 2019) (internal quotation marks & 8 citation omitted) “Further, the Younger abstention doctrine bars requests for declaratory and 9 monetary relief for constitutional injuries arising out of a plaintiff's ongoing state criminal 10 prosecution.” Id., citing Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Brockington v. Wolfson
Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Williams v. The People of the State of California
Cal. Mar. 15, 2019). 12 “Further, the Younger abstention doctrine bars requests for declaratory and monetary relief for 13 constitutional injuries arising out of a plaintiff’s ongoing state criminal prosecution.” Id., citing 14 Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir.1986). 15 B.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Cook v. Las Vegas Metro Police Department
Mann v. Jett, 10 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Orth v. Duffy
Mann v. Jett, 16 17 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
(PS) Vicari v. Jackson
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
Cf. Gilbertson, 381 25 F.3d at 982 (Younger applies where plaintiff’s claims are based on alleged violations of his 26 federal rights in pending state administrative proceeding); Mann, 781 F.2d at 1449 (Younger applies where claim is based on denial of right to counsel in ongoing state criminal case).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Raulie v. Gore
See Rule 1(b) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases (“The district court may apply any or all of these rules to a habeas corpus 28 | || Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 46 (1971); Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1985) 2 ||(“When a state criminal prosecution has begun the Younger rule directly bars a 3 || declaratory judgment action” as well as a section 1983 action for damages “where such 4 ||an action would have a substantially disruptive effect upon ongoing state criminal 5 || proceedings.”). 6 In sum, principles of comity and federalism require a federal court to abstain from …
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
(PC) Acevedo v. Unknown
See Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 46 (1971); Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir.1985) (“When a state criminal prosecution 25 has begun the Younger rule directly bars a declaratory judgment action” as well as a section 1983 action for damages “where such an action would have a substantially disruptive effect upon 26 ongoing state criminal proceedings.”). 27 2 If leave to file in forma pauperis is granted, plaintiff will still be required to pay the $350.00 28 filing fee but will be allowed to pay it in installments. 1 | Therefore, plaintiffs letter is disregarded.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Duell v. Genser
Moreover, to the extent Plaintiff seeks 25 ||injunctive relief “against the Superior Court of California” related to ongoing criminal proceedings in CD279745, see, e.g., Compl., ECF No. | at 33-34, Younger v. Harris, 401 © 37 (1971) requires the federal court to abstain where the party can adequately litigate 27 ||his constitutional claims in the state criminal proceedings, and where the § 1983 suit 2g “would have a substantially disruptive effect upon [those] proceeding[s].” Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
(PC) Gay v. Superior Court of California
Mann v. 12 Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Karriem v. Extended Stay America Inc
Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986). 9 The plaintiff cannot bring claims against the defendants for cooperating with law enforcement 10 prior to his arrest if the state proceeding is pending.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Karriem v. Cellco Partnership Inc., d/b/a Verizon Wireless Inc.
Mann v. Jett, 8 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986). 9 The plaintiff cannot bring claims against Verizon for cooperating with law enforcement prior to 10 his arrest if the state proceeding is pending.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Jerry Anderson v. On Habeas Corpus
Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Cooper v. Las Vegas Metro Police Department
Mann v. Jett, 15 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Cope v. State of Nevada
Mann v. Jett, 10 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Charlotte A. Geivett v. Unknown
Ed. 2d 669 (1971); Mann 15 v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
American Consumer Publishing Association, Inc. v. Margosian
(2×)
In Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir.1986) (per curiam), we cited the "substantially disruptive" rule in approving abstention from a § 1983 claim for declaratory relief and money damages.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
American Consumer Publishing Ass'n v. Margosian
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
In Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir.1986) (per curiam), we cited the “substantially disruptive” rule in approving abstention from a § 1983 claim for declaratory relief and money damages.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Davidson v. City of Bellflower
Martinez v. Newport Beach City, 125 F.3d 777, 781 (9th Cir.1997) (citing Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir.1986) (per curiam)), overruled on other grounds by Green, 255 F.3d at 1092-93 .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Burgie v. Contra Costa Sherriff's Department
The district court properly abstained under our holding in Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448 (9th Cir.1986) (per curiam), because an opportunity existed “to adequately litigate in the ongoing state criminal proceedings [Burgie’s] underlying claim of unconstitutional [behavior by state actors,] ... and [because] ‘the potential for federal-state friction [resulting from federal intervention] is obvious.’ ” Mann, 781 F.2d at 1449 (final alteration in original) (quoting Guerro v. Mulhearn, 498 F.2d 1249, 1253 (1st Cir.1974)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
In Re I.G. Services Ltd.
Dow Jones, 842 F.2d, at 608-09 ; see also The News-Journal Corp. v. Foxman, 939 *394 F.2d 1499, 1512 (11th Cir.1991); Radio & Television News Ass’n v. United States District Court for the Central District of California, 781 F.2d 1448, 1446 (9th Cir.1986) (restraining order not directed at the press does not restrain press’ First Amendment rights).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Miriam G. Carroll v. City of Mount Clemens, John Beeding, Jr., Harry Diehl, Jolyne Fisher, and Rex A. Burgess
(2×)
See Amerson v. Iowa, 94 F.3d 510 , 513 (8th Cir.1996), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 696 , 136 L.Ed.2d 618 (1997); Kyricopoulos v. Town of Orleans, 967 F.2d 14 , 15 n. 1 (1st Cir.1992); Traverso v. Penn, 874 F.2d 209, 213 (4th Cir.1989); Williams v. Hepting, 844 F.2d 138, 144-45 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 851 , 109 S.Ct. 135 , 102 L.Ed.2d 107 (1988); Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir.1986); Doby v. Strength, 758 F.2d 1405, 1406 (11th Cir.1985); Parkhurst v. Wyoming, 641 F.2d 775, 777 (10th Cir.1981).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Korean Buddhist Dae Won Sa Temple v. City and County of Honolulu
For example in Mann v. Jett, decided before Deakins , the Ninth Circuit held that Younger abstention warranted dismissal where the § 1983 damages claim in federal court would have a “substantially disruptive effect upon ongoing state criminal proceedings.” 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th 1986).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Summerfield v. Holcomb
Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir.1986) (per curiam). 15 AFFIRMED. * The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Carbone v. Zollar
Corp., 824 F.2d 567, 569 (7th Cir.1987); Mann v. Jett, 781 F.2d 1448, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986); Doby v. Strength, 758 F.2d 1405,1406 (11th Cir.1985); Parkhurst v. Wyoming, 641 F.2d 775 , 777 (10th Cir.1981); Landrigan v. Warwick, 628 F.2d 736, 743 (1st Cir.1980); McCurry v. Allen, 606 F.2d 795, 799 (8th Cir.1979), rev’d on other grounds, 449 U.S. 90 , 101 S.Ct. 411 , 66 L.Ed.2d 308 (1980); see also Jones v. Takaki, No. 92-7076, 1993 WL 41420 (N.D.Ill.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
David Allen MANN, Plaintiff/Appellant,
v.
Rita JETT, Ricki MacEy, and County of Pima Arizona, Defendants/Appellees
v.
Rita JETT, Ricki MacEy, and County of Pima Arizona, Defendants/Appellees
85-2008.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Feb 10, 1986.
David Allen Mann, Florence, Ariz., for plaintiff/ appellant., Thomas E. Dugal, Tucson, Ariz., for defendants/ appellees.
Browning, Sneed, Hug.
Cited by 113 opinions | Published
Citer courts: Second Circuit (2)
PER CURIAM:
Mann appeals from a summary judgment in favor of the defendants in an action for declaratory relief and money damages brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1982) against Pima County, Rita Jett (an attorney in the Pima County Attorney’s office), and Ricki Macey (a legal assistant in the same office) alleging denial of Mann’s sixth amendment right to counsel.
Mann contends that his sixth amendment right to counsel was abridged because although his Arizona indictment issued on July 8, 1983, and he requested counsel on April 5, 1984, counsel was not appointed to represent him until March 29, 1985. The delay in appointment of counsel was due to difficulties in extradicting Mann from California.
The Supreme Court has held that “a federal court should not enjoin a state criminal prosecution begun prior to the institution of the federal suit except in very unusual situations, where necessary to prevent immediate irreparable injury.” Samuels v. Mackell, 401 U.S. 66, 69, 91 S.Ct. 764, 766, 27 L.Ed.2d 688 (1971) (citing Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 91 S.Ct. 746, 27 L,Ed.2d 669 (1971)). It is clear that a state criminal prosecution has “begun” within the meaning of the Younger rule when, as in this case, an indictment has been returned. See Younger, 401 U.S. at 38-39, 41, 91 S.Ct. at 747, 749. When a state criminal prosecution has begun, the Younger rule directly bars a declaratory judgment action. Samuels, 401 U.S. at 73, 91 S.Ct. at 768. While the Supreme Court has not decided whether Younger requires abstention in the context of a section 1983 damage action, see Juidice v. Vail, 430 U.S. 327, 339 n. 16, 97 S.Ct. 1211, 1219, n. 16, 51 L.Ed.2d 376 (1977), several circuit courts have abstained where such an action would have had a substantially disruptive effect upon ongoing state criminal proceedings. See McCurry v. Allen, 606 F.2d 795, 799 (8th Cir.1979), rev’d on other grounds, 449 U.S. 90, 101 S.Ct. 411, 66 L.Ed.2d 308 (1980); Martin v. Merola, 532 F.2d 191, 194-95 (2d Cir.1976); Guerro v. Mulhearn, 498 F.2d 1249, 1251-55 (1st Cir.1974).
We conclude that abstention is appropriate under the circumstances of this case. Mann can adequately litigate in the ongoing state criminal proceedings his underlying claim of unconstitutional deprivation of counsel, and “the potential for federal-state friction [resulting from federal intervention] is obvious.” Guerro, 498 F.2d at 1253.
REVERSED AND REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.