[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED
________________________ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
June 19, 2006
No. 05-17120 THOMAS K. KAHN
Non-Argument Calendar CLERK
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 05-22434-CV-UUB
DANNY ADAMS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
STATE OF FLORIDA,
SECRETARY OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, Glenda E. Hood,
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF FLORIDA, Charlie Crist,
GOVERNOR, STATE OF FLORIDA, Jeb Bush,
Defendants-Appellees.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
_________________________
(June 19, 2006)
Before DUBINA, CARNES and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Appellant Danny Adams, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s
dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. Adams argues on appeal that the
district court erred in dismissing his complaint under the Younger1 doctrine
because federal courts must intervene whenever they have the power and there is
an injury, and alternatively, that his loss of freedom constitutes a sufficient
irreparable injury to justify intervention.
We review a district court's decision to abstain from exercising its
jurisdiction for an abuse of discretion. Wexler v. Lepore, 385 F.3d 1336, 1338
(11th Cir. 2004).
“The Supreme Court has said that federal courts have a ‘virtually unflagging
obligation . . . to exercise the jurisdiction given them.’ But ‘virtually’ is not
‘absolutely,’ and in exceptional cases federal courts may and should withhold
equitable relief to avoid interference with state proceedings. While non-abstention
remains the rule, the Younger exception is an important one.” 31 Foster Children
v. Bush, 329 F.3d 1255, 1274 (11th Cir. 2003) (internal citations omitted).
“Although Younger concerned state criminal proceedings, its principles are ‘fully
applicable to noncriminal judicial proceedings when important state interests are
involved.’” Id. The Younger doctrine bars federal court intervention in state
1
Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 91 S. Ct. 746, 27 L. Ed. 2d 669 (1971).
2
noncriminal proceedings where the proceedings constitute an ongoing state judicial
proceeding, the proceedings implicate important state interests, and there is an
adequate opportunity in the state proceedings to raise constitutional challenges. Id.
As alleged in his complaint, Adams’s state child support enforcement case
falls within these three prongs. The conduct he seeks to enjoin—a civil contempt
finding accompanied by a threat of jail—indicates that the proceeding is pending.
The ability to collect child support payments is an important state interest. Adams
has also indicated that he had the opportunity to not only raise his constitutional
issues in the state court proceedings, but also appeal them to a Florida District
Court of Appeals. Therefore, we conclude from the record that the district court
did not abuse its discretion by abstaining, under the Younger doctrine, from
exercising its jurisdiction over Adams’s claims. Accordingly, we affirm the
judgment of dismissal.
AFFIRMED.
3