Brown ex rel. Brown v. Day, No. 06-3387.
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (10th Circuit) |
| Writing for the Court | Ebel |
| Citation | 555 F.3d 882 |
| Parties | Dena K. BROWN, by her brother and next friend, Donald C. BROWN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Robert M. DAY, in his official capacity as Director, Kansas Division of Health Policy and Finance, Defendant-Appellee. |
| Docket Number | No. 06-3387. |
| Decision Date | 13 January 2009 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
133 practice notes
-
Braverman v. New Mexico, No. CIV 11-0829 JB/WDS
...to immunity because they did not have jurisdiction over her out-of-state account. See Second Motion ¶¶ 15-16, at 6-7 (citing Brown v. Day, 555 F.3d 882, 888 (10th Cir. 2009)). She alleges that the public will lose confidence in the judicial system if the Court does not grant her Second Moti......
-
Guillemard-Ginorio v. Contreras-Gomez, No. 08-1302.
...to warrant abstention. See Kercadó-Meléndez v. Aponte-Roque, 829 F.2d 255, 259-61 (1st Cir.1987); see also Brown ex rel. Brown v. Day, 555 F.3d 882, 884-85 (10th Cir.2009) (holding that proceeding challenging state agency's decision to terminate Medicaid benefits was remedial and not coerci......
-
Kanciper v. Suffolk Cnty. Soc'y for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Inc., No. 12–CV–2104 (ADS)(ARL).
...party or the underlying nature and substance of the proceedings, the state court actions here are clearly remedial. See Brown v. Day, 555 F.3d 882, 896 (10th Cir.2009) (Tymokovich, J., dissenting) (“By making the distinction turn on the underlying nature and substance of the administrative ......
-
Kanciper v. Suffolk Cnty. Soc'y for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Inc., 12-CV-2104 (ADS)(ARL)
...party or the underlying nature and substance of the proceedings, the state court actions here are clearly remedial. See Brown v. Day, 555 F.3d 882, 896 (10 Cir. 2009) (Tymokovich, J., dissenting) ("By making the distinction turn on the underlying nature and substance of the administrative p......
Request a trial to view additional results
129 cases
-
ETP Rio Rancho Park, LLC v. Grisham, No. CIV 21-0092 JB/KK
...preliminary investigation and complaint); Middlesex, 457 U.S. at 433 (same).Sprint, 571 U.S. at 79-80. See Brown ex rel. Brown v. Day, 555 F.3d 882, 891 (10th Cir. 2009)("In these cases, the federal plaintiff [seeks] to thwart a state administrative proceeding initiated to punish the federa......
-
Columbian Fin. Corp. v. Stork, Case No. 14-2168-SAC
...and whether it is the type of state proceeding that is due the deference accordedPage 10by Younger abstention. Brown ex rel. Brown v. Day, 555 F.3d 882, 888 (10th Cir. 2009). Plaintiffs admit that there is a pending state proceeding, but contend that it is not due Younger deference because ......
-
Braverman v. New Mexico, No. CIV 11-0829 JB/WDS
...to immunity because they did not have jurisdiction over her out-of-state account. See Second Motion ¶¶ 15-16, at 6-7 (citing Brown v. Day, 555 F.3d 882, 888 (10th Cir. 2009)). She alleges that the public will lose confidence in the judicial system if the Court does not grant her Second Moti......
-
Guillemard-Ginorio v. Contreras-Gomez, No. 08-1302.
...to warrant abstention. See Kercadó-Meléndez v. Aponte-Roque, 829 F.2d 255, 259-61 (1st Cir.1987); see also Brown ex rel. Brown v. Day, 555 F.3d 882, 884-85 (10th Cir.2009) (holding that proceeding challenging state agency's decision to terminate Medicaid benefits was remedial and not coerci......
Request a trial to view additional results