Legal Opinion
Coles v. Granville
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided May 22, 2006No. 05-3342PublishedCited by 80 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CLAY, Circuit Judge.
Plaintiff landowners appeal the January 25, 2005 order of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, which dismissed Plaintiffs’ 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985(2), 1985(3), and state law claims against Defendant public officials and railroad companies for actions taken relative to Plaintiffs’ real property.’ The district court held that Plaintiffs’ action was not ripe in part, barred by the Rook-er-Feldman doctrine in part, and merited Younger abstention in part.
For the reasons which follow, we AFFIRM the district court’s dismissal of this case.
I
BACKGROUND
2Cases cited35 opinions
- District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. FeldmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Middlesex County Ethics Committee v. Garden State Bar Ass'nSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by80 opinions
- Eidson v. Tennessee Department of Children's ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2007
- Jerald Thomas v. Unknown EbyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2007
- Braun v. Ann Arbor Charter TownshipCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2008
- Nimer v. Litchfield Township Board of TrusteesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2013
- Whittiker v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2009
75 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.