N.D.N.Y.: Younger doctrine bars suit against state AG investigation’s subpoena

Plaintiffs’ claims that various constitutional rights were infringed by the state Attorney General’s alleged politically motivated investigation are barred by the Younger doctrine. As to the Fourth Amendment claim, it was directed at subpoenas. Trump v. James, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95250 (N.D.N.Y. May 27, 2022).

An inflatable boat seized with a yacht for forfeiture was reasonably related to the yacht to be included within the forfeiture. United States v. Vaccaro, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95130 (N.D.Ohio May 12, 2022).*

There was probable cause for plaintiff’s arrest. The excessive force claim fails on qualified immunity. Amaral v. City of San Diego, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 14561 (9th Cir. May 26, 2022).*

Defendant’s 2255 search claim is based on alleged newly discovered evidence. It’s not. The search was litigated in the criminal case. Hester v. United States, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95226 (E.D.Tex. May 26, 2022).*

This entry was posted in Forfeiture, Issue preclusion, Qualified immunity, Subpoenas / Nat'l Security Letters. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.