Ronald Liedel and Elizabeth Liedel v. The Juvenile Court of Madison County, Alabama, and the Alabama Department of Human Resources

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a federal order enjoining an state juvenile court from enforcing its prior child custody orders “would effectively nullify those state orders”
• recognizing that “under Younger [abstention,] federal district courts may not interfere with ongoing child custody proceedings”
• holding that complaint must be dismissed under Rooker–Feldman where relief would “effectively nullify . . . state orders”
• holding that Younger required dismissal of an action requesting an injunction against the issuance of orders by a state juvenile court
• “Thus, under Younger . . . federal district courts may not interfere with ongoing child custody proceedings.”
• “Because the district court lacked jurisdiction over this complaint, it should not have considered the merits of the plaintiffs’ claims.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).