Legal Opinion · Concurrence

In Re One2One Communications, LLC

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided July 21, 2015No. 13-3410Published

1ConcurrenceKrause, Circuit Judge

I agree wholeheartedly with the majority’s equitable mootness analysis, which we are compelled to undertake under our controlling precedent. I write separately, however, because I do not believe we should persist in our failed attempts to cabin this legally ungrounded and practically unadministrable “judge-made abstention doctrine.” In re Semcrude, L.P., 728 F.3d 314, 317 (3d Cir.2013). Rather, the time has come to reconsider whether it should exist at all, and, if we conclude it should, to reform it substantially.

Although we adopted equitable mootness en banc in In re Continental Airlines,…

2Cases cited78 opinions

  1. Younger v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. Pearson v. CallahanSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  3. Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  4. Teague v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  5. International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977

73 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API