Paul Castonguay, Sr. v. Jack Taff

390 F. App'x 619
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedAugust 25, 2010
Docket10-1663
StatusUnpublished

This text of 390 F. App'x 619 (Paul Castonguay, Sr. v. Jack Taff) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Paul Castonguay, Sr. v. Jack Taff, 390 F. App'x 619 (8th Cir. 2010).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Paul Castonguay appeals the district court’s 1 preservice dismissal without prejudice of his pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. Upon careful de novo review, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in abstaining under Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 91 S.Ct. 746, 27 L.Ed.2d 669 (1971), because Cas-tonguay’s complaint sought intervention in state-court adoption proceedings. See Moore v. Sims, 200 F.3d 1170, 1171 (8th Cir.2000) (per curiam) (standard of review for dismissal); Norwood v. Dickey, 409 F.3d 901, 903 (8th Cir.2005) (abstention holding reviewed for abuse of discretion). Accordingly, we affirm.

1

. The Honorable Laurie Smith Camp, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Younger v. Harris
401 U.S. 37 (Supreme Court, 1971)
Norwood v. Dickey
409 F.3d 901 (Eighth Circuit, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
390 F. App'x 619, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/paul-castonguay-sr-v-jack-taff-ca8-2010.