Legal Opinion
Meredith v. Oregon
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided February 27, 2003No. 01-35869PublishedCited by 87 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PAEZ, Circuit Judge.
The posture of this case raises significant jurisdictional concerns. At issue is whether we may exercise our pendent appellate jurisdiction to review, on interlocutory appeal, the district court’s denial of a motion to dismiss on the basis of Younger abstention in conjunction with reviewing the court’s grant of a preliminary injunction. The State of Oregon (“State”) urges us to exercise pendent appellate jurisdiction and to review the denial of its motion to dismiss. In contrast, Meredith contends that we lack jurisdiction to review the denial. We hold that, because…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- Younger v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Middlesex County Ethics Committee v. Garden State Bar Ass'nSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Abney v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Pennzoil Co. v. Texaco Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1987
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by87 opinions
- Manuel De Jesus Ortega Melendr v. Joseph M. ArpaioCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- ReadyLink Healthcare, Inc. v. State Compensation Insurance FundCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- In re Pegasus Gold Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- John Doe v. Regents of the UniversityCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
- AmerisourceBergen Corp. v. RodenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
82 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.