United States Sixth Circuit

In an action brought by a state court judge under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 against disciplinary counsel for the Supreme Court of Ohio alleging a due process violation arising from an investigation into allegations of plaintiff's judicial misconduct, dismissal of the complaint and denial of injunctive relief are affirmed where: 1) the district court correctly found that Younger abstention was appropriate and that it could not grant injunctive relief; and 2) plaintiff's argument under Parratt was foreclosed.

Appellate Information

• Decided 11/28/2006
• Published 11/28/2006

Judges

• GILMAN, Circuit Judge., Before:  GILMAN and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges;  HEYBURN, Chief District Judge.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Percy Squire, Percy Squire Co., LLC, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellant.  Stephen W. Funk, Roetzel & Andress, LPA, Akron, Ohio, for Appellee.   ON BRIEF:  Percy Squire, Percy Squire Co., LLC, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellant.  Stephen W. Funk, Roetzel & Andress, LPA, Akron, Ohio, for Appellee.