Opinion
Civil No. 03-249-M, Opinion No. 2003 DNH 185
October 29, 2003
ORDER
By order dated June 6, 2003, plaintiff was directed to show cause why its complaint should not be dismissed, or why this court should not abstain and stay the case, in deference to an earlier-filed and pending state case. Based upon plaintiff's Memorandum of Law in Support of This Court's Jurisdiction, neither the relevant abstention doctrines nor the Rooker-Feldmen doctrine present any impediment to the exercise of jurisdiction over this case.
Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971), see also Colo. River Water Conservation Dist. v. U.S., 424 U.S. 800 (1976).
Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413 (1923);D.C, Ct. of App. v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462 (1983).