Neely

Planned Parenthood of Southern Arizona v. Neely

Good Law
130 F.3d 400·1997 WL 721937
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 21, 199796-17016California1,395 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Stephen Neely, Attorney for the County of Pima, as class representative, appeals the district court’s holding that the State of Arizona’s parental consent abortion statute is unconstitutional, and its order permanently enjoining enforcement of the statute. Neely also appeals the district court’s decision to permit the plaintiffs to supplement the complaint that formed the basis of a previous action between the same parties, and its decision to proceed under the class certification of that previous action. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Because we hold that the district court abused its discretion in permitting the plaintiffs to supplement their complaint, we vacate the injunction granted by the district court, and remand and direct the district court to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

In August, 1989, Planned Parenthood of Arizona brought an action to enjoin the defendants from enforcing Arizona’s parental consent abortion statute. Plaintiffs included physicians and health care providers who provided medical care, including abortions, to minor women to whom the statute applied. Defendants included prosecuting attorneys and…

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.