Richmond, Fredericksburg & Potomac R. Co. v. Forst

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that a statute of limitations “defense may be raised under Rule 12(b)(6), but only if it clearly appears on the face of the complaint”
• noting that a Rule 12(b)(6) motion \is intended to test the legal adequacy of the complaint\
• stating that Younger abstention doctrine “recognizes that state courts are fully competent to decide issues of federal law” and “has as a corollary the idea that all state and federal claims should be presented to the state courts.
• finding extraordinary circumstances where Congress has passed legislation to “define[] an entire category of cases in which ‘extraordinary circumstances’ exist to justify federal court intervention”
• affirming dismissal where the claim failed as a matter of law
• “A court’s task is to ascertain whether, in light of the heavy presumption in favor of retaining jurisdiction, exceptional circumstances justify its surrender.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).