Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. Mike Mulamba Mbanza

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not apply to a suit seeking review of state agency action
• holding that “the inquiry into whether suit lies under Ex Parte Young does not include an analysis of the merits of the claim”
• holding that § 252 of the TCA “at least does not divest the district courts of their authority under 28 U.S.C. § 1331”
• holding that the provision for federal review of \determination[s]\ by state utilities in 47 U.S.C. § 252(e)(6
• holding that “the inquiry into whether suit lies under Ex parte Young does not include an analysis of the merits of the claim”
• holding that statute does not strip federal courts of federal question jurisdiction absent plain statement or fair implication

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).