Montes

Montes v. City of Bellflower

Good Law
61 F. App'x 385
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 4, 2003No. 02-55492; D.C. No. CV-98-05613-FMCCalifornia308 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Angel Montes appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim against the City of Bellflower. The district court gave issue-preclusive effect to the City Council’s decision to revoke Montes’ permit to sell alcohol. The district court also rejected Montes’ contention that he reserved his federal claims under England v. Louisiana State Bd. of Med. Examiners, 375 U.S. 411 , 84 S.Ct. 461 , 11 L.Ed.2d 440 (1964). While the district court properly gave preclusive effect to the City Council’s decision to revoke Montes’ permit, we find that the court erred in rejecting Montes’ England reservation.

England allows a party who has been remitted to state court to reserve the right to return to federal court for a ruling on the federal claims. England, 375 U.S. at 415 . The Supreme Court intended to give litigants the right to have their federal claims resolved in federal court. Id. at 415-16 . While some courts have applied England only in Pullman abstention cases, the Ninth Circuit has made clear that England applies whenever a party finds itself involuntarily remitted to state court. United Parcel Serv., Inc. v. California Pub. Utilities Comm’n, 77 F.3d…

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.