Alan Ness v. Kamala Harris

MEMORANDUM

In No. 12-16950, Mitchell J. Stein appeals from an order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action on the basis of Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 , 91 S.Ct. 746 , 27 L.Ed.2d 669 (1971). District courts are required to abstain from jurisdiction and dismiss the suit under “Younger where: (1) state proceedings are ongoing [at the time the federal suit is filed]; (2) important state interests are involved; and (3) the plaintiff has an adequate opportunity to litigate federal claims in the state proceedings.” Canatella v. California, 304 F.3d 843, 850 (9th Cir.2002). The underlying Attorney General’s civil enforcement action against Stein and the State Bars assumption proceedings satisfy these criteria. See Middlesex Cnty. Ethics Comm. v. Garden State Bar Ass’n, 457 U.S. 423, 431-35 , 102 S.Ct. 2515 , 73 L.Ed.2d 116 (1982). Stein has not shown that the state actions are inadequate for him to raise any constitutional or other federal claims he may have. See id. at 435-36 , 102 S.Ct. 2515 .

In No. 12-16635, Stein and some of his former clients appeal the denial of “a temporary restraining order and order to show cause regarding preliminary injunction.” Our disposition of the…