Legal Opinion
Fierle v. Perez
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided October 28, 2009No. 08-16461PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM ***
Patricia and Daniel Fierle appeal from the district court’s order dismissing their complaint pursuant to the doctrine of Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States, 424 U.S. 800, 96 S.Ct. 1236, 47 L.Ed.2d 483 (1976). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in applying the Colorado River factors. See Holder v. Holder, 305 F.3d 854, 870 (9th Cir.2002). As a threshold requirement, the federal and state court actions must be “substantially similar.” Nakash v. Marciano, 882 F.2d 1411, 1416 (9th…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Jeremiah W. Holder v. Carla R. Holder, Jeremiah W. Holder v. Carla R. HolderCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Avi Nakash, Joe Nakash, and Ralph Nakash v. Georges Marciano, Maurice Marciano, Armand Marciano, Paul MarcianoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- Coopers & Lybrand v. Sun-Diamond Growers Of CaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
3Cited by1 opinion
- Sea Prestigio, LLC v. M/Y TritonDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2011