United States v. Coloian

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “Kokkonen forecloses any ancillary jurisdiction to order expungement based on [the individual’s] proffered equitable reasons”
• holding that “Kokkonen forecloses any ancillary jurisdiction to order expungement based on [the individual’s] proffered equitable reasons”
• holding that “[a]s in Kokkonen, the original claims brought before the district court in this [criminal] case have nothing to do with the equitable grounds upon which Coloian seeks the expungement of his criminal record”
• holding that “[a]s in Kokkonen, the original claims brought 13 before the district court in this [criminal] case have nothing to do with the 14 equitable grounds upon which Coloian seeks the expungement of his 15 criminal record”
• holding no ancillary jurisdiction to order expungement based on petitioner’s proffered equitable grounds
• attorney’s arrest, trial, and acquittal were factually correct and, so, the court properly denied expungment of his records.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).