Document: 409 U.S. 467 93 S.Ct. 627 34 L.Ed.2d 651 AMERICAN TRIAL LAWYERS ASSOCIATION, NEW JERSEY BRANCH, et al.v.NEW SUPREME COURT. No. 72-691. Jan. 15, 1973. PER CURIAM. 1 On December 21, 1971, the Supreme Court of New Jersey announced adoption Rule 1:21—7, effective Januay o1, 1972, establishing a graduated schedule maximum contingent fees applicable to tort litigation conducted by attorneys.1 Appellants, representing members bar, brought this action enjoin enforcement rules on grounds that they violate several provisions Constitution, including Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses Fourteenth Amendment. The trial judge convened three-judge court. 28 U.S.C. § 2281.2 2 After hearing argument merits, District pointed out that: 3 'Essentially case poses dispute between state's highest court those persons authorized practice law in state. relationship parties thus is an extremely delicate one. Under such circumstances federal courts generally have considered it appropriate, before attempting any direct ferderal intervention at outset, first permit state process dispute. Cf. Reetz v. Bozanich, 397 82, 85—87 (90 788, 25 68) (1970).' 4 added '(a)s was true initial issue whether constitution enactment challenged.' therefore granted defendant-appellee's motion dismiss. 5 By timely under Fed.Rule Civ.Proc. 59(e), appellants sought order amending judgment either 6 '(A) Retaining jurisdiction, but staying proceedings pending determination issues Jersey, or until efforts obtain determimnation been exhausted; 7 '(B) Ordering dismissal be without prejudice, so suits for constitutional may reinstituted after exhausting recouse with respect issues.' Jurisdictional Statement 10. 8 denied appeal.3 9 '(A)bstention 'does not, course, involve abdication only postponement its exercise." England Louisiana State Board Medical Examiners, 375 411, 416, 84 461, 465, 11 440 (1964), quoting from Harrison NAACP, 360 167, 177, 79 1025, 1030, 1152 (1959). For reason, we held abstention as pass must not prejudice. Doud Hodge, 350 485, 76 491, 100 L.Ed. 577 (1956); Lake Carriers' Assn. MacMullan, 406 498, 92 1749, 32 257 (1972). proper course retain jurisdiction courts. supra, 512—513, 1758; Zwickler Koota, 389 241, 244—245, n. 4, 88 391, 393, 394, 19 444 (1967).4 Although intended prejudice right litigate their claims concludsion proceeding, did deny appellants' amendment making clear no would attach. should granted. Accordingly, vacate remand consistent opinion. 10 Vacated remanded. 1:21—7 provides part: '(c) In matter where client's claim damages based upon alleged tortious conduct another, products liability claims, client subrogee, attorney shall contract for, charge, collect fee excess following limits: '(1) 50% $1000 recovered; '(2) 40% next $2000 '(3) 33 1/3% $47,000 '(b) 20% $50,000 '(5) 10% amount recovered over $100,000; . ..' Appellee maintained below, maintains Court, need because question presented insubstantial. Bailey Patterson, 369 31, 82 549, 512 (1962). It insists, however, if substantial then heard three judges. 2281. view posture appeal, do express merits presented. validity Court's decision abstain appeal. 'It better practice, raising statutory (where doctrine applied), rather than dismiss Zwickler, 244 393.

Category: 8