The following excerpt is from Curtis v. Swarthout, No. 2:14-cv-1358 KJN P (E.D. Cal. 2014):
2. In the July 21, 2014 order, the undersigned directed petitioner to address why dismissal pursuant to the Younger abstention doctrine was not appropriate if he was claiming that his claims were fully exhausted. See Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971). Because none of petitioner's claims are exhausted, the undersigned need not consider the issue of Younger abstention.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.