Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Ty Clevenger v. Melanie Lawrence, et al.

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 17-17136 · judgment December 26, 2018

Certiorari denied · June 24, 2019

Pre-decision estimate: 0% cert probability

Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.

Question presented

The Younger abstention doctrine "naturally presupposes the opportunity to raise and have timely decided by a competent state tribunal the federal issues involved." Trainor v. Hernandez, 431 U.S. 434, 441, 97 S. Ct. 1911, 1917, 52 L. Ed. 2d 486 (1977), quoting Gibson v. Berry hill, 411 U.S. 564, 577, 93 S.Ct. 1689, 1697,36 L.Ed.2d 488 (1973). Although California flatly prohibits its administrative hearing officers from considering federal claims, the Ninth Circuit has held that Younger applies anyway because parties might have a subsequent chance to present constitutional issues in "wholly discretionary" review by the California Supreme Court. See, e.g, Canatella v. California, 404 F.3d 1106, 1111 (9th Cir. 2005) ("Although judicial review is wholly discretionary, its mere availability provides the requisite opportunity to litigate"). In California, no such review has been granted in the 19 years since judicial review became "wholly discretionary." QUESTION: Where a state administrative hearing officer is prohibited from hearing a party's federal claim, may a federal court abstain from hearing that claim on the grounds that the party might be able to raise it later if judicial review is granted by a state court? In other words, is a remote possibility of state court judicial review sufficient for purposes of Younger abstention?

For petitioner
Ty Clevenger

For respondent
Robert G. Retana
The State Bar of California

Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference

Jun 24 2019
Petition DENIED.
Jun 04 2019
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/20/2019.
May 28 2019
Waiver of right of respondents Melanie Lawrence, et al. to respond filed.
May 22 2019
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 24, 2019)