Weekly v. Morrow

How courts have described this case

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

• indicating that “[f]ederal courts do not abstain on Younger grounds because they lack jurisdiction”
• Younger abstention is a “prudential decision not to exercise … jurisdiction which [a court] in fact possesses,” not a determination that the court lacks jurisdiction
• “The jurisdiction of the federal courts is established by the Constitution and by congressional statutes.”
• “‘[F]ederal district courts, as courts of original jurisdiction, lack appellate jurisdiction to review, modify, or nullify final orders of state courts.’” (quoted case omitted)
• “Federal courts do not abstain … because they lack jurisdiction; rather, [ ] abstention reflects a court’s prudential decision not to exercise equity jurisdiction which it in fact possesses.” (cleaned up)
• “Federal courts do not abstain … because they lack jurisdiction; rather, [ ] abstention ‘reflects a court’s prudential decision not to exercise [equity] jurisdiction which it in fact possesses.’” (footnotes omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).