Yelp Inc. v. Paxton

137 F.4th 944 · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · May 15, 2025 · No. 24-581

Summary

This Ninth Circuit opinion affirms the district court's dismissal of Yelp's federal lawsuit under the Younger abstention doctrine, which generally prohibits federal courts from interfering with ongoing state court proceedings. The court held that Yelp failed to meet the high burden required for the narrow "bad faith" exception, as the Texas Attorney General's civil enforcement action under the Deceptive Trade Practices Act was not facially meritless or brought solely to harass. Consequently, Yelp's First Amendment retaliation claims must be addressed within the pending state court litigation rather than through federal injunction.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Writing for the Court
Judge Bress; Judge Mark J. Bennett; Judge Daniel A. Bress; Judge Danielle J. Forrest
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decision date
May 15, 2025
Docket number
24-581
Procedural posture
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California
Standard of review
de novo
Precedential value
published
Parties
Yelp Inc. v. Ken Paxton, in his official capacity as Attorney General of Texas
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

injunctionscivil procedurefirst amendmentstate actionfederalism

Practice areas

civil procedureconstitutional lawcivil rightsfederalismconsumer protection

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Younger abstention doctrine’s narrow bad‑faith exception applies to Yelp’s federal suit seeking to enjoin the Texas state court proceeding
  2. Whether the district court erred in dismissing the case under Younger abstention

Holdings

  1. The court held that Younger’s narrow bad‑faith exception does not apply because Yelp failed to show that the Texas civil enforcement action was brought without a reasonable expectation of obtaining a valid judgment or was facially meritless, nor that it was motivated by harassing or retaliatory bad faith.
  2. The appellate court affirmed the district court’s dismissal.

Key quotations

The state proceedings were ongoing, involved quasi‑criminal enforcement, implicated an important state interest, and permitted federal constitutional defenses, and the federal action would have the effect of enjoining the proceedings. (at ___)
Younger’s narrow bad‑faith exception does not apply because Yelp has not sufficiently established that the Texas civil enforcement action was brought without a reasonable expectation of obtaining a valid judgment or was facially meritless. (at ___)

Factual background

Yelp posted a "First Notice" labeling crisis‑pregnancy centers as offering limited medical services; Texas Attorney General Paxton sued Yelp under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices‑Consumer Protection Act. Yelp filed a federal §1983 action alleging First Amendment retaliation and sought a preliminary injunction to stop the state suit. The district court dismissed the federal case under Younger abstention.

Procedural history

The district court dismissed Yelp's §1983 action seeking an injunction of Texas Attorney General Paxton's civil enforcement proceeding under the Younger abstention doctrine, finding that the bad‑faith exception did not apply. Yelp appealed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…