Filed March 21, 2014
7 Case 1:10-cv-08026-PKC Document 45 Filed 03/21/14 Page 11 of 15 Abstention from the exercise of federal jurisdiction is the narrow exception, not the rule. Cecos Int ‘l, Inc. v. Jorling, 895 F.2d 66 (2d Cir. 1990). Neither the first or third of the Younger criteria are applicable here.
Filed April 29, 2008
A. The Younger Doctrine Does Not Apply Here To justify a refusal to assume jurisdiction on the grounds set forth in Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971), this Court must conclude that the relief plaintiff seeks will interfere with “ongoing” state court enforcement proceedings. Cecos Int’l, Inc. v. Jorling, 895 F.2d 66, 72 (2d Cir. 1990). “Younger abstention does, in fact, depend on the ‘technicality’ of ongoing judicial proceedings.”