Summary
The United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts denied Terence Glenn’s motion for a temporary restraining order seeking to stay a state-court eviction proceeding and related state-court matters. The court held that the requested relief would improperly interfere with ongoing state litigation under the Anti-Injunction Act and principles of federal-state comity, and stated that no summonses would issue pending review of the complaint and other motions.
Holdings
- The court denied the TRO because the requested relief would interfere with an ongoing state-court proceeding in violation of the Anti-Injunction Act and principles of federal-state comity.
- The court denied relief concerning the “Miya” case because Glenn did not establish a basis for federal interference with that state-court matter.
Questions Presented
- Whether the federal district court could issue a temporary restraining order staying the pending state-court eviction proceeding.
- Whether Glenn established an extraordinary basis for federal interference with the related state-court matter.
Disposition
denied
Cases Cited (6)
- Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, 398 U.S. 281, 287 (1970)(followed)
- In re Justices of Superior Court Department of Massachusetts Trial Court, 218 F.3d 11, 16 (1st Cir. 2000)(followed)
- Smith v. Bayer Corp., 564 U.S. 299, 306 (2011)(followed)
- Chick Kam Choo v. Exxon Corp., 486 U.S. 140, 146 (1988)(followed)
- Mannix v. Machnik, 244 F. App'x 37, 39 (7th Cir. 2007)(followed)
- Kucherenko v. Chelsea Housing Authority, No. 22-cv-10955, 2023 WL 12098666, at *3 (D. Mass. Aug. 28, 2023)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…