Opinion ID: 183689
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Availability of State-Court Review

Text: Under the modern formulation of the Burford doctrine, a court weighing abstention must first determine whether timely and adequate state-court review is available. NOPSI, 491 U.S. at 361, 109 S.Ct. 2506. In making this assessment here, the district court found that the record abounds with evidence of adequate judicial review, citing the two lawsuits filed by Chico in the commonwealth courts as well as the availability under Puerto Rico law of judicial review for final agency decisions. See P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 3, §§ 2171-77. As a formal matter, the district court is correct that Puerto Rico law provides for review of administrative decisions, and the record provides no basis to doubt the adequacy of that review. We have significant concerns, however, about the timeliness of the review offered by commonwealth courts in the present case. The availability of judicial review for final orders by commonwealth agencies, id. § 2171, can hardly qualify as timely and adequate if, as here, the agency may take decades to issue a reviewable final order. Perhaps Chico could seek mandamus relief in a commonwealth court to force more prompt action by the EQB. Because Chico dismissed its mandamus petition upon settling with the EQB, though, the record does not reflect whether mandamus relief is available and effective, nor was the issue briefed by the parties. The experience of Chico's other commonwealth lawsuit, which was stayed in deference to the EQB, gives us little comfort that Chico could in fact obtain timely and adequate review of the EQB's actions in the commonwealth courts. [16]