# U n i t e d S t a t e s C o u r t o f A pp e a l s

For the Eig hth Circu it

_ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

No . 2 1 -3 3 67

_ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

3 7 5 Sl an e Ch ap el Ro ad

, LLC

ll l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l Pl a in t i

f f - Ap p el l an t

v

.

St on e Co u n t y , M i s s ou ri , et al

.

l l l l l l ll l l l l l l l l l l l l l Def

en d a n t s - Ap p el l ees

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Ap p eal fro m

Un i t ed St at es Di s t ri ct Co u rt

fo r t h e W es t ern Di s t ri ct o f M i s so u ri - J op l i n

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Su b m i t t ed : J u ne 1 5 , 2 02 2

Fi l ed : No v em

b er 2 2 , 2 02 2

_ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _

Befo re LOKEN an d KELLY, Ci rcu i t J u d g es , an d M ENENDEZ, Di s t ri ct J u d g e. *

_ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _

LOKEN, Ci rcu i t J u d g e.

J o s ep h a n d Yv o n n e Co rd el l o wn 3 7 5 Sl an e Ch ap el Ro ad

, L L C (“ 3 7 5 ”), a

l i m i ted l i ab i li t y co m

p an y tha t own s an d o p erat es a s ub s tan t i al v acat i o n h om e ad jacen t

t o Tab l e Ro ck Lak e i n St o n e Co u n t y

, M i s s o u ri

. W h en t h e Co rd el l s ’ p ers o n al u s e o f

* Th e Ho n orab l e K at h eri n e M

. M en en dez, Un i t ed St at es D i st ri ct Ju d ge fo r t h e

Di s t ri ct o f M i n n es o t a, s i t t i n g b y d es i g n at i o n

.t h e h om e d ecl i n ed

, 3 7 5 ap p l i ed i n Oct ob er 2 0 2 0 fo r a co n di ti o n al u s e p erm i t (“ CUP”)

t o ren t o u t t h e p ro p ert y t o s h o rt -t erm ren t ers o n p l at fo rm s s uch as Ai rb n b

. A CUP i s

req u i red b y Art

. 4

, § 2 5 o f t h e St o n e Co u n t y Zo n i n g R e gu l at i o ns (t h e “ Sh ort -Term

Ren tal Reg u l at i o n ”). Aft er a No v em ber 1 7 h eari n g at wh i ch 3 7 5 p res en t ed t es t i m o ny

an d ex hi b i t s i n fav or o f th e ap p l i cat i o n an d M arl i n Co n s t an ce, a n earb y p r o p e r t y

o wn er, s p o k e i n op p o s i t i o n

, th e St o n e Co un t y Pl a n n i n g & Zo n i n g Co m m i s s i o n

ap p ro v ed th e ap p l icat i o n b y a 7 -6 v o t e. Co n s t an ce ap pea l e d t h e Co m m i s s i o n ’ s

d eci s i o n to t h e St o n e Co u n t y Bo ard o f Ad ju s t m en t

. See St o n e Ct y

. Zo n i n g Reg

., Art

.

2 7

, § § 1 (F), 3

. Aft er a h eari n g o n Ap r i l 1 3

, 2 0 2 1 at wh i ch t h os e s u pp o rt i n g an d

o p p o s i n g 3 7 5’ s ap p l i cat io n ap p eared

, t h e Bo ard o f Ad ju st m en t v o t ed 3 -0 to rev ers e

t h e Pl an n i n g & Zo n i n g Co m m i s s i o n ’ s d eci s i o n an d d en y 3 7 5 a CUP.

On M ay 1 2, 3 7 5 fi l ed s ep arat e act i o ns i n s t at e an d fed eral co u rt t o o v ert u rn t h e

Bo ard o f Ad

j u s t m en t ’ s d eci s i o n. In t h e W es t ern Di s t ri ct o f Mi ss o u ri

, 3 75 fi l ed t h i s

fed eral act i o n, al l eg i n g t h at t h e Sh o rt -Term Ren t al Reg u l at i o n is u n co ns t i t u t i o n al l y

v ag ue on i t s face an d as a p p l i ed t o 3 7 5 b ecau s e, b y u s i n g t h e wo rd “ m ay ,” t h e

reg u l at i o n g iv es t h e Bo ard o f Ad ju s t m en t u n b ri dl ed d i s cret i on

. O n e h o u r l at er, 3 7 5

fi led a cert i o rari act i o n i n th e Ci rcu i t Co u rt of St o n e Co u n t y ag ai n s t t h e Bo ard o f

Ad ju s t m en t u n d er M o

. Rev

. St at

. § 6 4 .8 7 0, al l eg i n g t h at t h e Bo ard ’ s d eci s io n was n ot

s u p p ort ed b y co m

pet en t an d su b s t an t i a l ev id en ce, an d t h at t h e Bo ard u n l awfu l l y

ap p li ed th e Sh o rt -Term Ren t al Reg u l at io n i n a d i s parat e an d d i s cri m i n at o ry m an n er

i n vi o lat i o n o f t he Eq u al Pro t ect io n Cl au s es o f th e Un i t ed St at es an d M i s s o u ri

Co n s t i t u t i o n s. U.S. Co ns t . am en d . XIV, § 1 ; M o . Co n s t . art . 1 , § 2

.

Defen d an t s p ro m

p t l y m o v ed t o di s m i s s th i s l aws u i t

, arg u i n g

, as rel ev an t h ere,

t h at 3 7 5 ’ s fed eral cl ai m s are “ b arred b y t he Yo u n g er ab s t en t i o n d o ct ri n e.” In v o k i n g

Yo u n g er v

. Harri s

, 4 0 1 U.S. 3 7 (1 9 7 1 ), t h e d i s tri ct co u rt g ran t ed t h e m o t i o n,

ab s t ai n ed fro m ad

ju d i cat i n g t h e fed eral co m p l ai n t i n deferen ce to “ t he p aral l el s t at e

co u rt p ro ceed i ng ,” d i s m i s s ed 3 7 5 ’ s co m p lai n t wi t h ou t p reju d i ce, an d s u bs eq u en t l y

d en ied 3 7 5 ’ s Ru l e 5 9 (e) m o t io n t o a l t er o r am en d t h e ju d g m en t

. 3 7 5 ap p eal s t h es e

-2

-ru l i n gs

. Co n cl ud i n g t h at t h e d i s t ri ct co u rt m i s i n terp ret ed t h e “ ex cep t i o n al

ci rcu m s t an ces ” w arran t i n g Yo u n g er ab s t en t i o n as d efi n ed i n Sp ri n t Co m m u n i cat i on s

v . J aco bs , 5 7 1 U.S. 6 9, 7 8 , 8 2 (2 0 1 3 ), we rev ers e.

I . The Abs tenti on La nds ca pe

In Yo u n g er v. Harri s

, t h e Su p rem e Co u rt h el d t h at

, ab s en t “ ex t rao rd i n ary

ci rcu m s t an ces

, ” “ t h e p o s s ib l e u n co n s t i t u t i o nal i ty o f a [s t at e] s t at u te ‘ o n i t s face’ d o es

n o t i n it s el f ju s t i fy an i n

ju n ct i o n ag ai n s t g oo d -fai t h at t em p ts to en fo rce i t.” 4 0 1 U.S.

at 5 4

. T h ou g h Yo u n g er rev ers ed a fed eral c o u rt i n ju n ct i o n o f a s t at e cri m i n al

p ro s ecu ti o n

, t he Co u rt l at er “ cl ari fi ed an d ex pan d ed ” t h e s co p e o f t h e Y o u n g er

a b s t e n t io n d oct ri ne t o i n cl u d e l i m i t ed t y p es of ci v il cas es

. See M i n n. L i v i n g

A s s i s t an ce, In c. v. Pet ers on

, 8 9 9 F.3 d 54 8

, 5 5 1 (8 t h Ci r. 2 0 1 8 ), cert

. d en i ed

, 1 3 9

S. Ct

. 1 1 9 5 (2 0 1 9 ) (ci t i n g cas es ); 17 B Ch arl es Al an W ri g ht , et al

., Fed eral Pract i ce

& Pro ced u re § 4 2 5 4 (3 d ed

. 2 02 2 Su p p.). In M i d d l es ex Co u n t y E t h i cs Co m m i t t ee v.

Gard en St at e Bar As s o ci at i o n

, 4 5 7 U .S. 4 23 (1 9 8 2 ), wh ere an at t o rn ey ch al l en g ed t h e

co n st i t u t io n al i ty o f o n g oi ng s t at e at t orn ey d is ci pl i n ary p ro ceed in g s

, th e Co u rt

ex p lai n ed t h at “ [t ] h e p o l i ci es un d erl y i n g Yo u n ger are fu l l y ap pl i cab l e t o n o n cri m i n al

ju d i ci al p ro ceed i n g s wh en i m p o rt an t s t at e i nt eres t s are i n v ol v ed ,” s u ch as t he sta te b ar

d i s ci pl i n ary pro ceed i n g s at i s s u e. Id

. at 4 3 2 -3 4

. Ap pl y i n g M i dd l es ex

, fed eral co u rt s

i n s ub s eq u en t cas es co ns i d ered wh at are cal l ed t h e t hree “ M id d l es ex fact o rs ” in

d eci d i n g wh et h er t o ab s t ai n : wh et h er t h ere i s an “ ( 1 ) o n g o i n g s t at e ju d i ci al

p ro ceed in g

, wh i ch ( 2 ) i m p l i cat es i m

p o rt an t s t at e i n teres t s

, an d (3 ) p ro v i d es an

ad eq uat e o p p o rt un i t y t o rai s e fed eral ch al l en g es .” Sp ri nt

, 5 7 1 U.S. at 8 1 (cl ean ed u p ).

In New O rl ean s Pu bl i c Serv ice, In c. v

. Co u n ci l o f t h e Ci t y o f New Orl ean s

(“ NOPSI”), t h e Co u rt al t ered t h i s an al y s i s wh en i t em p h as i zed t h at “ o n l y ex cep t i o n al

ci rcu m s t an ces ju s t i fy a fed eral co u rt ’ s refu s al t o d e c i d e a cas e i n d eferen ce t o t h e

St at es .” 49 1 U.S. 35 0

, 36 8 (1 9 8 9 ). Th e Co u rt ex p lai n ed t h at t h e req u i si t e

“ ex cep t i o n al ci rcu m s t an ces ” are l i m it e d t o t h ree ty p es o f st at e ci v i l an d cri m i n al

-3

-p ro ce e dings: ( 1) “ p e nding sta t e cri m i n al pro s ecu t io n s ,” (2 ) cert ai n “ ci v i l en fo rcem en t

p ro ceed in g s ” w arran t i n g ab st en t i o n

, an d ( 3 ) “ ci v i l p ro ceed i n g s i n v o l v i n g cert ai n

o rd ers t h at are u n iq u el y i n fu rt h eran c e o f t h e s t at e co u rt s’ ab i l i t y t o p erfo rm t h ei r

ju d i ci al fu n ct i on s

. ” Id

. In NOPSI, t h e Co u rt rev ers ed t h e l o wer co urt s ’ d eci s i o n t o

ab s t ai n in a fed eral cas e s eek in g ju d i ci al rev i ew o f a ci t y co u n ci l ’ s rat e-m ak i n g

d eci s i o n b ecau s e rev i ew o f t h at d eci s i o n was al s o p en d i n g i n s t at e co u rt :

[I] t h as n ev er been s u gg es t ed th at Yo u n g e r req u ires ab s t en t io n i n

d eferen ce t o a st at e ju d i ci al p ro ceed i n g rev i ewi n g l eg i s l at i v e o r

e x e c u t i v e act i o n

. Su ch a b ro ad ab s ten t i o n req u i rem en t wo ul d m ak e a

m o ck ery of t h e ru le t h at on l y ex cep t i o n al ci rcu m s t an ces ju s t ify a fed eral

co u rt ’ s refu s al to d eci d e a cas e i n d eferen ce t o t he St at es

. . . . [W ] e h av e

n ev er ex t en d ed [Yo u ng er] t o p ro ceed i n g s t h at ar e n o t ‘ ju d i ci al i n

n at u re.’

. . . Th e Co u n ci l ’ s p ro ceed i n g s in t h e p res en t ca s e w e r e n o t

ju d i ci al i n n at u re.

* * * * *

Th ere i s n o co n t en t i o n h ere t h at th e Lo ui s i an a co u rt s ’ rev iew [o f

t h e Co un ci l ’ s d eci s i o n] i n v o l v es an y t h i n g o t h er t h an a ju d i ci al act

. . . . As a ch al l en g e t o co m

p l et ed leg i s l at i v e a c t i o n

, NOPSI’ s s u i t

. . . i s

, i n s o far as o u r p o li ci es o f fed eral co m i t y are c o n cern ed

, n o d i fferen t i n

s u b s t an ce fro m a faci al ch al l en g e t o an al l eg ed l y u nc on s t i t u ti o n al st at ut e

o r zo n i n g ord i n an ce -- wh i ch we wo u l d as s u red ly n o t req u ire t o b e

b ro u g h t i n s t at e co u rt s

.

I d

. at 3 6 8

, 3 7 0

, 3 7 2 (cl ean ed u p ). In rev ers i n g

, t h e Co u rt ap p l i ed i t s l o n g -s t a n d i n g

p ri n c i p l e t h at “ fed eral co u rt s l ack t h e au t h ori t y t o ab s t ai n fro m t h e ex erci s e o f

ju ri s d i ct i o n t h at h as b een co n ferred ,” a p ri n ci p l e t h at “ do [es ] n o t cal l i n t o q u es t i o n,

t h e fed eral co u rt s’ d i s cret i o n in d et erm i n i n g wh et h er t o g ran t cert ai n ty p es o f rel i ef.”

Id . at 3 5 8 -5 9 (ci t at i on s o m i t ted ).

-4

-Ov er two d ecad es l at er, rev i ewi n g a d m i n i s t rat iv e act i o n b ei ng ch al l en g ed in

fed eral an d s tat e co u rt , t he Su p rem e Co u rt ag ai n rev ers ed a ci rcu i t co urt ab s t en t i o n

o rd er, th i s t i m e b y o u r co u rt

, i n Sp ri n t Co m m u n i cat i on s v

. J aco b s

. In an o pi n i o n by

J u s t i ce G i ns b u rg

, t h e u n an i m ou s Co urt

, ci t in g N OPSI, em p h as i zed t h at “ fed eral

co u rt s are o b l i g ed t o d eci d e cas es wi t h in th e sco p e of fed eral ju ri s di ct i o n

. Ab s t en t i o n

i s n o t i n o rd er s i m

p l y b ecau s e a p en d i n g st at e-co u rt p ro cee d i n g i n v o l v es t h e s am e

s u b ject m at t er.” 57 1 U .S. at 7 2

. Rat h er, Yo u n g er ex t en d s o n l y t o th e t h ree

“ ex cep t i o n al ci rcu m s t an ces ” t h e Co u rt i d en ti fi ed i n NOPSI

– s t at e c ri m i n al

p ro s ecu ti o n s

, ci vi l en fo rcem en t p ro ceed in g s, a nd “ c i vil pr oc e e dings i nvol vi n g cert ai n

o rd ers

. . . u n i q u el y i n fu rt h eran ce o f t he st at e co urt s ’ ab i l i t y to p erfo rm t h ei r ju d i ci al

fu n ct i o n s .” Id

. at 7 8

, ci t i n g NOPSI, 4 9 1 U.S. at 3 6 8

, an d t wo p ri o r cas es NOPSI ci t ed

t o d efi n e t h e t h i rd l i m i t ed cl as s o f cas es

. N o t i n g t hat o u r co urt h ad rel ied o n t h e

M i d d l es ex fact o rs to s u p p o rt ab s ten t i on

, t h e C o u rt ex p l ai n ed t hat t h e M i d d l es ex

fact ors are “ ad d i t i o nal fact ors ap p ro p ri at el y co n s i d ered

. . . b efo re in v o k i n g

Yo u n g er,” i d . at 8 1

, t o b e co n s i d ered a f ter t h e NOPSI cat eg o ry h as b een s at i s fi ed :

Di v o rced fro m t h ei r qu as i-cri m in al co n t ex t

, t he t h ree M i d d l es ex

co n d i t i o n s wo u l d ex t en d Yo u n g er t o v i rt u al l y al l p aral l el s t a t e an d

f e d e r a l p ro ceed i n g s

, at l eas t wh ere a p art y co u l d i d en t i fy a p lau s i b l y

i m p o rt an t s tat e i nt eres t. Th at res u l t i s i rreco n ci l ab l e w i t h o u r d o m i n an t

i n s t ru ct i o n t h at

, ev en i n t h e p res en ce of p aral l el s tat e p ro ceed i n g s

, ab s t en ti o n fro m t h e ex erci s e o f fed eral ju ri s d i ct i o n i s th e “ ex cep ti o n

, n o t

t h e ru l e.” In s h ort

, t o g ui d e o t h er fed eral co urt s

, w e t o d a y cl ari fy an d

a ffi rm t h at Yo u n g er ex t en d s t o t h e t h ree “ ex cep ti o nal ci rcu m s tan ces ”

i d en ti fi ed i n NOPSI, b u t n o fu rt h er.

Id

. at 8 1 -8 2 (ci t at i on s o m i t t ed ). Ap p l y i n g t h i s d i rect iv e, we h el d i n M i n n es o t a Li v i n g

As s is t an ce, 8 9 9 F.3 d at 5 5 2

, t h at d et erm in i n g wh et h er Yo u n g er ab s t en t i o n i s

ap p ro p ri at e req ui res a t h ree-p art i n q u i ry :

Fi rs t

, d o es t h e u n d erl y i n g s t at e p ro ceed i n g fal l w i t hi n o n e o f t h e t h ree

“ ex cep t io n al ci rcu m st an ces ” wh ere Y o u n g er ab s t en ti o n i s ap p ro p ri at e?

-5

-Seco n d

, i f th e u nd erl y i ng p ro ceed i n g fi t s wi t h i n a Yo u n g er cat eg o ry

,

d o es t h e s t at e p ro ceed i n g s at i s fy wh at are kn o wn as t h e “ M id d les ex ”

fact o rs ? An d t h i rd

, ev en i f t h e u n d erl y i n g s t at e pro ceed i n g s at i s fi es th e

fi rs t t wo i n q u i ri es , i s ab st en ti o n n ev ert h el es s in ap p ro p ri at e b ecau s e an

ex cep t i on t o ab s ten t i o n ap p li es ?

Th e d is t ri ct co u rt ’ s d eci s i on t o ab s t ai n i s rev i ewed fo r ab u s e o f d is cret i o n

. “ W h et h er

Yo u n g er ab s t en t i o n is ap p ro pri at e i s a q u es t i on of law, an d t h e d i s t ri ct co u rt ab u s es

i t s d i s cret i o n wh en i t m ak es an erro r o f l aw.” Id . at 5 5 1 (ci t at i o n s o m it ted ).

I I . Di s cus s i on

Ci t i n g M i n n es o t a Li vi n g As s i s t an ce, t h e d i s t ri ct co u rt co rrect ly reco g n i zed

“ t h at a fed eral co u rt s h o u l d ab st ai n fr o m ex erci s i n g ju ri s d i ct i o n o v er a cas e [u n d er

Yo u n g er] i f t h ere i s a p aral l el s t at e p ro c e ed i n g wh ich fi t s i n t o o n e o f t h ree n arro w

cat eg o ri es .” Bu t t h e co u rt fel l o ff t h e p ro p er an al y t i cal p at h wh en i t q u o ted t h e t h i rd

cat eg o ry as p arap h ras ed i n M i n n es o t a Li v i n g As s i s t an ce -- “ a p ro ceed i n g i m p l i cat i n g

a s t at e’ s i n teres t i n en fo rci n g t h e o rd ers an d ju d g m en t s of i t s co urt s

, ” 8 9 9 F.3 d at 5 5 2

-- in s t ead o f t h e th i rd cat eg ory as carefu l l y d efi n ed in NOPSI an d q u o t ed v erb at i m in

Sp ri n t

-- “ ci v i l p ro ceed i n g s i n v o l v i n g cert ai n o rd ers th at are u n i q u el y i n fu rt h eran ce

o f t h e s t at e co u rt s ’ ab i li t y t o p erfo rm

t h ei r ju d i ci al fu nct i o ns .” 4 9 1 U.S. at 3 6 8

.

Th e di st ri ct co u rt ’ s d efi n i t i o n o f wh at we wi l l cal l Cat eg ory 3 s h ares t h e fl aw

i n rel y in g ex cl u s i v el y o n t h e M i d d l es ex fact o rs i d en t i fi ed b y t h e Su p rem e Co u rt in

Sp ri n t

-- i t “ wo u l d ex t en d Y o u ng er t o vi rt ual l y al l p a r a l l e l s tat e an d fed eral

p ro ceed in g s

. . . wh ere a p art y co u l d i d en ti fy a p l au si b l y im po rt an t s t at e i n t eres t .”

5 7 1 U.S. at 8 1

. Th e t w o cas es ci t ed b y NOPSI as ex am p l es o f Cat eg o ry 3 m ak e cl ear

t h at i t s fo cu s i s i ns t i t ut i o n al

-- “ t h e s t at e co u rt s ’ ab i l i t y t o p erfo rm th ei r ju d i ci al

f u n c t i o n s ”

-- n ot s i m

pl y t h e St at e’ s i n teres t i n en fo rci n g a p art i cu l ar co u rt o rd er.

NOPSI, 4 9 1 U .S. at 3 6 8

. Bo t h i n v o l v ed ch al len g es t o t h e p ro ces s b y wh i ch a St at e

co m p el s co m p l i an ce wi t h t h e ju d g m en t s o f i t s co u rt s

. Ju i d i ce v

. Vai l

, 4 3 0 U.S. 3 2 7,

-6

-3 3 5 -3 6 (1 9 7 7 ), i n v ol v ed th e s t at e co u rt s ’ ab i l i t y t o e n fo rce a ci vi l co n t em p t o rd er;

Pen nz o i l C o

. v

. Tex aco

, In c., 4 8 1 U .S. 1

, 1 3 -1 4 (1 98 7 ), i nv o l v ed t h e s t at e co urt s ’

ab i l i t y t o en fo rce a p o s t i n g o f bo n d p en d in g ap p eal

. See 4 3 0 U.S. at 3 3 5 ; 4 8 1 U.S.

at 3 -6

.

Th e part i es ’ b ri efs on ap p eal fo cu s ed al m o st en ti rel y o n t h e M i d d les ex fact o rs

,

s k i p p i n g o ver th e fi rs t i n qu i ry wh i ch a part y s eek i n g Y o u n g er ab s t en ti o n m u s t s at i s fy

.

W h en as k ed at o ral arg u m en t wh i ch o f t h e t h ree NOPSI cat eg o ri es ap p l i es

, co u n s el

fo r D e f e n d a n t s s ai d cat eg o ri es “ t wo an d t h ree are b o t h p o ten t ial can d i d at es t o b e

ap p li ed i n t h i s s i t u at io n.” 1 W e co n cl u d e n ei t h er cat eg ory ap p l ies an d t h eref o r e t h e

d i s t ri ct co u rt erred i n ab s t ai n in g u nd er Yo u n g er.

A. Ca teg o ry 2

. Th e s eco n d NOPSI cat eg o ry

, a “ ci vi l en fo rcem en t

p ro ceed in g ,” i s l i m i ted t o cas es i n v o l v in g s t at e p ro ceed i n g s t h at are “ ak i n t o a

cri m i n al p ro s ecu t i o n ” “ i n i m p o rt an t res pect s .” Hu ffm an v. Pu rs u e, Lt d., 4 2 0 U.S.

5 9 2

, 6 0 4 (1 9 7 5 ). Th at i s

, ci v i l p ro ceed i n g s t h at are “ q u as i -cri m i n al ” i n n a t u re.

Sp ri n t , 5 7 1 U.S. at 8 1

. In d eci d i n g t h is q u es t i on

, t h e Co urt i n Sp ri n t as k ed : (1 ) was

t h e act i o n co m

m en ced by t h e St at e i n i t s s o v erei g n cap aci ty ? (2 ) W as t h e pro ceed i n g

i n i t i at ed to s an ct i o n t h e fed eral p l ai n t i ff fo r s o m e w ro n g fu l act ? (3 ) Are t h ere o t h er

s i m i l ari t i es t o cri m in al act i o n s

, s u ch as a p rel im i n ary i n ves t i g at i o n cu l m i n at i n g i n t h e

fi li n g o f fo rm al ch arg es ? See i d . at 7 9 -8 0

.

W e co n cl u d e t h at

, wi t h o u t q u es t i o n

, n ei t h er t h e ad m i n i s t rat i v e zo n i n g

p ro ceed in g

, n o r t h e o n -g o i ng cert i o rari pro ceed i n g seek i n g j u d i c i al rev i ew o f t h e

Ad ju s t m en t Bo ard ’ s d eci s i o n

, w a s q uas i -cri m i n al i n n at u re. Th ere i s n o s t at e

en fo rcem en t p ro ceed i n g h ere, n o act i o n i n it i at ed b y “ th e St at e i n i t s so v erei g n

cap aci t y .” Sp ri n t, 5 7 1 U.S. at 8 0

. 3 7 5

, a p ri vat e co m p an y

, i n i t i at ed t h e ci v i l

1 NOPSI Cat eg o ry 1 u n q u es t i o n ab l y d o es n o t ap p l y as t h i s cas e d o es n o t i n v o l v e

a cri m i n al p ro ceed i n g. Sp ri n t, 5 7 1 U.S. at 7 8

.

-7

-ad m i n is t rat i v e p ro ceed i n g t o ob t ai n a n eed ed perm it

. Th i s p ri v at e act i o n i s n o t “ ak in

t o a cri m i n al p ro s ecu t i o n .” Hu ffm an

, 4 2 0 U.S. at 6 0 4

. 37 5 ’ s fed eral co m pl ai n t d o es

n o t al l eg e t h at a g o v ern m en t au t h o ri t y i n v es t i gat ed 37 5 ’ s act i v i t i es o r lo d g ed a fo rm al

co m p l ai n t ag ai n s t 3 7 5. Defen d an t s arg u e, wi t h o u t ci t i n g an y au t h ori t y

, t h at Cat eg o ry

2 ap p li es b ecau s e St o n e Co un t y mi gh t h av e b eg u n en fo rcem en t p ro ceed i n gs h ad 3 7 5

n o t ap pl i ed fo r a CUP. Co u n s el at o ral arg u m en t co u l d n o t i d en t i fy a p ri n ci p l e t h at

wo u l d l i m i t t h i s t h eo ry o f “ ex cep t i o n al ci rcu m st an ces ,” an d o th er co u rt s h av e refu s ed

t o ap p l y t h e d o c t r i n e i n si m i l ar ci rcu m s t an ces

. See Ti t l em ax o f Del

., In c. v.

W ei s s m an n

, 2 4 F.4 t h 2 3 0

, 2 3 7 (3 d Ci r. 20 2 2 ) (“ po s si b i l i t y o f co n tem pt ” p ro ceed i ng s

d o es n o t t ri g g er Y o un g er ab s t en t i o n ). Ab s t en t i o n i s “ t he ex cep t i o n, n o t t he ru l e,” an d

Yo u n g er ab s t en t i on i s l i m i t ed t o t h e t h ree N OPSI “ ex cep t io n al cat eg o ri es .” Sp ri n t

,

5 7 1 U.S. at 8 2. Here, t h e NOPSI Cat eg o ry 2 s ho e d o es n o t fi t

.

B. Ca teg o ry 3

. Th e t h i rd NOPSI c a t e g o r y is l im it ed to “ ci v il p ro ceed i ng s

i n v o l v i n g cert ai n ord ers t h at are u n i q u el y i n fu rt h eran ce o f th e s t at e co u rt s ’ ab i l i t y to

p erfo rm th ei r ju d i ci al fu n ct i o n s .” 4 9 1 U.S. at 3 6 8. Th e d i s t ri ct co urt ’ s d eci s i o n t h at

t h i s cas e f

a l l s wi t h i n Cat eg o ry 3 refl ect ed i t s fl awed d efi n i ti o n o f t he s co pe o f t h i s

cat eg o ry

. Th e co u rt co n cl u d ed t h at “ t hi s part i cu lar s t at e co u rt p ro ceed i n g i s

s u ffi ci en t l y j u d i ci al i n n at ure t o ‘ i m p l i cat e t he s t at e’ s i n t eres t i n en fo rci n g th e o rd ers

an d ju dg m en ts o f i t s co u rt ’” b e c a u s e ju d i ci al ap p eal o f an act i on ap p ly i n g zo n i n g

reg u l at i o n s i s “ q u as i -ju d ici al i n n at u re,” an d “ Mi ss o u ri ’ s ab i l i t y t o ad m i n i s t er zo n i n g

an d l an d u se-rel at ed m at t ers i s an i m p o rt an t s t at e i n teres t i m

p l i c a t i ng pri n ci p l es o f

co m i t y an d fed eral i s m .” In s u p p o rt

, t h e co u rt ci t ed Ni g ht Cl u b s

, In c. v

. Ci t y o f Fo rt

S m i t h

, 1 6 3 F.3 d 4 7 5 (8 t h Ci r. 1 9 9 8), a d eci s i o n t h at ap p l i ed t h e M i d d les ex fact o r s

wi t h o u t ad d res si n g wh et h er t he cas e fel l wi t h in at l eas t o ne o f t h e NOPSI cat eg o ri es

.

At o ral arg u m en t

, D efen dan t s arg u ed t hat Cat eg ory 3 ap p li es b ecau s e p l an n i n g

an d zo n i n g l a n d

- u s e i s s u es are q u i n t es s en t i al m at t ers o f s t at e l aw an d t h erefo re

fed eral co u rt s s h o u l d n ot i n t erfere wi t h th es e pro ceed i n gs

. Li k e t h e d i s tri ct co u rt

,

Defen d an t s fo cu s o n i n t erferen ce wi th m at ters o f s t at e i n t eres t

, a M i d dl es ex fact o r

-8

-t h at i s o n l y ad dres s ed i f N OPSI Cat eg o ry 3 i s s at i s fi ed

. Defen d an t s em p h as i ze t h at

“ t h e St at e Act i o n i s o ng oi n g an d ju d i ci al i n n at u re.” Bu t t h i s ig n ores t h e Su p rem e

Co u rt ’ s rep eat ed rem i n der t hat paral l el s t at e co u rt p ro ceed i n g s d o n o t d et ract fro m t h e

“ v i rt u al l y u n fl ag g i n g o b l i gat i o n ” o f fed eral co u rt s “ to ex erci s e t h e ju ri sd i ct i o n g i v en

t h em .” Sp ri n t , 5 7 1 U.S. at 7 7

.

Cat eg o ry 3 is l i m i t ed t o ci v i l p ro ceed in g s i n v o l v in g o rd ers “ u n i q u el y in

fu rt heran ce of t h e s t at e co urt s’ ab i l it y t o p erfo rm t hei r ju d i ci al fu n ct i o n s .” Cat eg o ry

3 d o es n o t i n cl u d e “ a s t at e ju d i ci al p ro ceed i n g rev iewi ng l eg i s l at i v e o r ex ecu t i v e

act i on ,” s u ch as d en y in g 3 75 a zo n in g p erm i t

. N OPSI, 4 9 1 U

. S. at 3 6 8 ; s ee FCA US,

LLC v

. Sp i t zer Au t o w o rl d Ak ro n

, LLC, 8 8 7 F.3 d 2 7 8

, 2 90 ( 6 t h Ci r. 2 0 1 8 ) (“ [t ] h e

Oh i o ad m i n i s trat iv e p ro ceed i n g [at i s s ue] h as n o rel at i o n t o

. . . o rd ers t h at are

u n i q u el y i n fu rt h eran ce o f t h e ju d i ci al fu n ct i o n o f t h e Oh i o co urt s .”). No r i s Cat eg o ry

3 t ri g g ered s i m

p l y b ecau s e t h e s tat e ci v i l ad m i n is t rat i v e p ro ceed i n g i n vo l v es a

q u i n t es s en t i al l y s tat e-l aw m at ter s u ch as zo n i n g an d l an d -u s e pl an n i n g

. See, e.g

.,

Cav an au g h v

. Geb al le, 2 8 F.4 t h 4 2 8

, 4 3 2 -3 5 (2 d Ci r. 2 02 2 ) (p ro b at e p ro ceed i n g s );

Co o k v

. Hard i n g

, 87 9 F.3 d 1 0 3 5, 1 0 4 0 -4 1 (9 t h Ci r. 2 0 1 8 ) (fam i l y l aw); Bo ers ch i g v.

Tran s -Peco s Pi p el in e, L .L.C., 8 7 2 F.3 d 7 0 1

, 7 0 5 n .2 (5 t h Ci r. 2 0 1 7) (em i n en t -d o m ai n

p ro ceed in g s ). Becau s e t h i s p aral l el fed eral act i o n d o es n o t i n t erfere wi t h “ t h e s t at e

co u rt s ’ ab i l i t y t o p erfo rm t h ei r ju d i ci al fu n ct i o n s,” i t d o es n o t fal l wi t h in t h e n arro w

p aram et ers o f NOPSI Cat eg o ry 3 an d t h erefo re d o es n o t dep ri v e t he di s t ri ct co u rt o f

ju ri s d i ct i o n

.

Th e J u d g m en t of t h e d i s t ri ct co u rt i s rev ers ed an d t h e cas e i s rem an d ed t o t h e

d i s t ri ct co u rt fo r fu rt h er p ro ceed i n g s n o t in co n si st en t w i th t h i s o p in i o n. 2 On rem an d,

g i v en t h e p aral l el s t at e co u rt p ro ceed in g

, we u rg e th e di s t r i ct co u rt t o fo cu s o n t h e

2 As we co n cl u de t h e d i s t ri ct co u rt erred i n d i s m i s s i n g 3 75 ’ s Co m p l ai n t wi t h o ut

p reju d i ce, we n eed n o t ad d res s t h e co u rt ’ s den i al o f 3 7 5 ’ s m o t i o n fo r p o s t -ju d g m en t

rel i ef u n der Fed . R. Ci v

. P. 5 9 (e).

-9

-Su p rem e Co u rt ’ s rem in d er t hat a d eci s i o n n o t to ab s tai n “ d o [es ] n o t cal l i nt o q u es t i o n,

t h e fed eral co u rt s’ di scret i o n in d et erm i n i n g wh et h er t o g ran t cert ai n ty p es o f rel i ef.”

NOPSI, 4 9 1 U.S. at 3 5 8 -5 9; cf. W i n d o w W o rl d

, In t ’ l

, LLC v

. O ’ T o ol e, 2 1 F.4 t h 1 0 2 9,

1 0 3 4 (8 t h Ci r. 2 02 2 ).

__ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _

-1 0

-