Zena D. Crenshaw v. The Supreme Court of Indiana

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that the plaintiff “must present more than mere allegations and conclusions” to establish her entitlement to a Younger doctrine exception
• stating that mere allegations of bad faith without supporting facts are insufficient to trigger Younger bad faith exception
• explaining that a plaintiff “must present more than mere allegations and conclusions”
• rejecting argument that plaintiff’s mere allegations of bias and bad faith had to be construed in her favor to establish a bad faith exception
• dismissing action against the Supreme Court of Indiana and the Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of Indiana because they were barred from suit by the Eleventh Amendment
• affirming denial of Younger abstention in part because plaintiff failed to allege “specific facts to support her inferences of bad faith, bias, and retaliation” beyond “mere allegations and conclusion” to claim state court judges were biased against her

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).