This site is a developmental version of Wiki Law School. To go to the production site: www.wikilawschool.org
Information for "Section 1983 Litigation/Abstention Doctrines"
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
Display title | Section 1983 Litigation/Abstention Doctrines |
Default sort key | Section 1983 Litigation/Abstention Doctrines |
Page length (in bytes) | 38,736 |
Page ID | 21080 |
Page content language | en - English |
Page content model | wikitext |
Indexing by robots | Allowed |
Number of redirects to this page | 0 |
Counted as a content page | Yes |
Number of subpages of this page | 0 (0 redirects; 0 non-redirects) |
Edit | Allow all users (infinite) |
Move | Allow all users (infinite) |
View the protection log for this page.
Page creator | Lost Student (talk | contribs) |
Date of page creation | 00:18, June 28, 2020 |
Latest editor | DeRien (talk | contribs) |
Date of latest edit | 11:42, May 23, 2023 |
Total number of edits | 2 |
Total number of distinct authors | 2 |
Recent number of edits (within past 90 days) | 0 |
Recent number of distinct authors | 0 |
Transcluded templates (5) | Templates used on this page:
|
Description | Content |
Article description: (description ) This attribute controls the content of the description and og:description elements. | Even though a federal court has subject-matter jurisdiction over a § 1983 action, it may decline to exercise that jurisdiction if the case falls within one or more of the abstention doctrines. These abstention doctrines are intended to apply in relatively narrow circumstances. The Supreme Court has described a federal court’s obligation to adjudicate claims properly within its jurisdiction as “virtually unflagging.”[1] Accordingly, “[a]bstention from the exercise of federal jurisdiction is the exception, not the rule,”[2] and the Court has limited the circumstances appropriate for abstention. |
Information from
Extension:WikiSEO