Opinion ID: 20797
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: jurisdiction

Text: Appellees Cory and Sherie Miner (the Miners) contend that we lack jurisdiction over this appeal. The decision to stay a case on grounds of Burford abstention is a final appealable order, and is also appealable under the collateral order doctrine. See Quackenbush v. Allstate Ins. Co., 517 U.S. 706, 712-14 (1996); Barnhardt Marine Ins., Inc. v. New England Int’l Sur. of Am., Inc., 961 F.2d 529, 531 (5th Cir. 1992). The Miners also challenge the district court’s subject matter jurisdiction. Even if, as the Miners argue, the district court lacked jurisdiction under the Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1350, the court had diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(2), which grants jurisdiction over suits between “citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state,” and as discussed below, the “domestic relations exception” to diversity jurisdiction does not apply. The Begums are citizens of India2 and the Miners are citizens of Texas.