FILED
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
November 24, 2009
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Elisabeth A. Shumaker
Clerk of Court
CHRISTOPHER YNOSENCIO
YSAIS,
Plaintiff–Appellant,
v. No. 09-2125
(D.C. No. 1:08-CV-00595-MV-DJS)
CHILDREN YOUTH AND FAMILY (D. N.M.)
DEPARTMENT; JENNIFER LYNN,
as an employee of CYFD, and as an
individual; HAVEN HOUSE, as an
individual; DIANA TORRANCE, as
the director of Haven House, and as
an individual; STATE OF
NEW MEXICO,
Defendants–Appellees.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before LUCERO, GORSUCH, and HOLMES, Circuit Judges.
*
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of
this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is
therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is
not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata,
and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value
consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
The district court dismissed Christopher Ynosencio Ysais’ civil-rights
claims under the abstention doctrine of Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971),
and under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) for failure to state a claim and for seeking
damages from state employees with immunity from monetary relief. We agree
with the analysis of the district court and dismiss the appeal as frivolous.
This case arises from ongoing child-custody proceedings in state court and
a state criminal action for alleged child abuse (which apparently terminated in
favor of Ysais). Ysais complains that state authorities, including defendant
Jennifer Lynn, alleged child abuse without conducting a proper investigation,
produced misleading evidence, resisted his request for the presence of an attorney
at an interview, and improperly required him to attend domestic-violence and
parenting classes. Further, he asserts that Haven House, through defendant Diana
Torrance, provided therapeutic services to his son without his consent and refused
to provide him with his son’s records.
Ysais bases his federal claims on the theory that defendants violated his
property rights, interfered with his family relations, discriminated against him as
a Hispanic single father, and conspired to terminate his parental rights. The
complaint also sets forth state claims of outrageous conduct, defamation,
false-light invasion of privacy, and “corruption.” Ysais seeks injunctive relief in
connection with the state-court custody proceedings and also damages from
defendants.
-2-
The district court first determined that the Younger abstention doctrine
barred its consideration of Ysais’ claims. We agree. In the absence of
extraordinary circumstances, the Younger doctrine directs federal courts to refrain
from interfering in ongoing state civil proceedings. Morrow v. Winslow, 94 F.3d
1386, 1393 (10th Cir. 1996). The comity considerations of the doctrine are
particularly vital in “child custody proceedings[, which] are an especially delicate
subject of state policy.” Id.
Because Ysais asked to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), the district court
also reviewed the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), which requires dismissal
of an IFP claim that: “(i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on
which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant
who is immune from such relief.” § 1915(e)(2)(B). The district court concluded
that, under these standards, Ysais’ federal claims must be dismissed. It declined
to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state claims. Later, the district
court denied Ysais’ motion for reconsideration of its rulings. We agree with the
district court’s analysis.
-3-
Having reviewed Ysais’ submissions and the record on appeal in light of
the governing law, we DISMISS this appeal as frivolous. All pending motions
are DENIED.
ENTERED FOR THE COURT
Carlos F. Lucero
Circuit Judge
-4-