Sprint Communications Company v. Jacobs
Sign up to make a prediciton!
|Case Term||OT 2013|
|Question Presented||Whether the Eighth Circuit erred by concluding that Younger abstention is warranted not only when there is a related state proceeding that is “coercive” but also when there is a related state proceeding that is, instead, “remedial.”|
|Lower Court's Decision||No|
|Research for TWEN users
Outcome - Reverse
This case was decided on 09 December, 2013.