Frank E. Midkiff v. Paul A. Tom

Good Law
704 F.2d 425·1983 U.S. App. LEXIS 28834
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 14, 198380-4368California248 words

Opinion

Opinion

ORDER

The motion for an injunction directing the parties to stay further prosecution of the matter entitled Hawaii Housing Authority, Plaintiff, v. Frank E. Midkiff, et al., Defendants, now pending in the Circuit Court of the First Circuit, State of Hawaii, at Civil No. 63408 thereof, is denied.

While appellants have shown a likelihood of “probable success” on the merits of their claim, William Inglis & Sons Baking Co. v. ITT Continental Baking Co., 526 F.2d 86, 88 (9th Cir.1976), they have not presently demonstrated the requisite immediate irreparable injury, Benda v. Grand Lodge of the International Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers, 584 F.2d 308, 314-15 (9th Cir.1978), or the “real and concrete injury,” Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum Commission v. National Football League, 634 F.2d 1197, 1201 (9th Cir.1980), which would entitle them to an injunction against ongoing state judicial proceedings. The record does not present any “other extraordinary circumstance,” Middlesex County Ethics Committee v. Garden State Bar Association, 457 U.S. 423, 435 , 102 S.Ct. 2515, 2523 , 73 L.Ed.2d 116 (1982), such as would require intervention now. Neither may it be presumed that the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.