Legal Document

112 S.Ct. 2206 504 U.S. 689 119 L.Ed.2d 468 Carol ANKENBRANDT, as Next Friend and Mother of L.R. S.R., Petitionerv.Jon A. RICHARDS Debra Kesler. No. 91-367. Argued March 31, 1992. Decided June 15, Syllabus Petitioner brought this suit on behalf her daughters in the District Court, alleging federal jurisdiction based diversity-of-citizenship provision 28 U.S.C. § 1332, seeking monetary damages for alleged torts committed against girls by their father his female companion, respondents here. The court granted respondents' motion to dismiss without prejudice, ruling alternative that it lacked because case fell within "domestic relations" exception diversity its decision was justified under abstention principles announced Younger v. Harris, 401 37, 91 746, 27 669. Court Appeals affirmed. Held: 1. A domestic relations exists a matter statutory construction. Pp. 693-701. (a) stems from Barber Barber, 21 How. 582, 584, 16 L.Ed. 226, which dicta, citation authority or discussion foundation, courts have no over suits divorce allowance alimony. lower ever since recognized limitation statement, is unwilling cast aside an understood rule has existed nearly century half. 693-695. (b) An examination Article III, 2, Constitution progeny makes clear does not mandate exclusion cases federal-court jurisdiction. Rather, origins lie requirements De La Rama Rama, 201 303, 307, 26 485, 486, 50 765. 695-697. (c) That demonstrated inclusion defining phrase, "all civil nature at common law equity," pre-1948 versions statute, Barber's implicit interpretation phrase exclude alimony actions, Congress' silent acceptance construction century. Considerations stare decisis particular strength context, where legislative power implicated, Congress remains free alter what done. Patterson McLean Credit Union, 491 164, 172-173, 109 2363, 2370, 105 132. Furthermore, may be presumed amended statute 1948 replace law/equity distinction with 1332's actions" full cognizance Court's longstanding prior statutes, that, absent any indication intent contrary, adopted reenacting statute. 697-701. 2. permit district refuse exercise tort action damages. exception, articulated encompasses only involving issuance divorce, alimony, child custody decree. As so limited, exception's validity must reaffirmed, given long passage time expression congressional dissatisfaction sound policy considerations judicial economy expertise. Because lawsuit way seeks decree, erred affirming invocation exception. Federal subject-matter pursuant 1332 proper case. 701-704. 3. abstaining exercising doctrine. Although extended never applied notions comity critical where, here, proceeding pending state tribunals. Similarly, while inconceivable certain circumstances developed Burford Sun Oil Co., 319 315, 63 1098, 87 1424, might relevant elements relationship even when parties do seek custody, such inappropriate status been determined law, event bearing underlying alleged. 704-706. 934 F.2d 1262 (CA 5 1991), reversed remanded. WHITE, J., delivered opinion REHNQUIST, C.J., O'CONNOR, SCALIA, KENNEDY, SOUTER, JJ., joined. BLACKMUN, filed concurring judgment. STEVENS, judgment, THOMAS, Richard Lynn Ducote, New Orleans, La., petitioner. Paul S. Weidenfeld, respondents. Justice WHITE Court. 1 This presents issue whether should abstain former husband petitioner companion petitioner's children, sole basis 1332. 2 * Ankenbrandt, citizen Missouri, September 26, 1989, S.R. Jon Richards Kesler, citizens Louisiana, United States Eastern Louisiana. Alleging citizenship Ankenbrandt's complaint sought sexual physical abuse children divorced Kesler companion.1 On December 10, 1990, lawsuit. Citing In re Burrus, 136 586, 593-594, 10 850, 853, 34 500 (1890), proposition "[t]he whole subject wife, parent child, belongs laws States," concluded become known jurisdiction, also invoked 669 (1971), justify prejudice. Ankenbrandt Richards, 89-4244, 1990 WL 211545 (ED La.Dec. 1990). affirmed unpublished opinion. 91-3037 (CA5 May judgt. order reported 1262. 3 We certiorari limited following questions: "(1) Is there jurisdiction? (2) If so, damages?2 (3) Did err doctrine [supra]?" 502 ----, 855, 116 764 (1992). address each these issues turn. II 4 upon below relied decline often courts. seeming doing originally stemmed announcement 226 (1859), case, heard equity wife (by next friend) husband. She enforce decree York court, had awarded thereupon moved Wisconsin place himself beyond courts' could enforced him; he then sued representing abandoned him failing disclose existence accepted gave judgment wife. appeal, argued two grounds: first, although divorced, wife's necessarily remained husband; second, including exclusively ecclesiastical adoption therefore placed Over dissent three Justices, rejected both arguments. After exhaustive survey authorities, acquire separate rested reached conclusions after summarily dismissing husband's contention involved outside stating, however, jurisdiction: 6 "Our first remark is—and we wish remembered asking done competent asked interfere prevent being defeated fraud. 7 "We disclaim altogether either original chancery incident vinculo, one bed board." supra, 584. 8 general matter, dissenters agreed statements, but took holding instant 9 statements disclaiming suits, though technically formed excluding courts, jurisdictional those since. cited did discuss foundation announcement. Since time, dealt occasionally addressed limitation. are half, feel compelled explain why will continue recognize Counsel prohibited cases. Brief Appellant D.T. 1858, 44, pp. 4-5. itself, our otherwise 11 provides pertinent part: 12 "Section Power shall extend all Cases, Law Equity, arising Constitution, Laws States, Treaties made, Authority;—to Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers Consuls;—to admiralty maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies Party;—to between more States;—between State Citizens another State;—between different same claiming Land Grants State, thereof, foreign Subjects." 13 section delineates absolute limits But articulating terms define jurisdiction—"Cases, Equity," "Cases," "Controversies"—this contains subjects nature. Nor purport ground constitutional hear mention see logical presume statement limiting narrower statutory, rather than broader constitutional, grounds. Cf. Edward J. DeBartolo Corp. Florida Gulf Coast Building & Construction Trades Council, Inc., 485 568, 575, 108 1392, 1397, 99 645 (1988). 14 Subsequent decisions confirm relying justifying instance, stated "long established rule" lack matters having assumptions "husband cannot usually marriage relation continues (a somewhat relaxed recent cases), further reason itself involves pecuniary value." 765 (1906). III limit 's articulation "rule" supports view grounded Constitution. 15 Moreover, citing approval language purporting matters, appeals territorial see, e.g., supra; Simms Simms, 175 162, 20 58, 44 115 (1899), upheld Columbia decide Glidden Co. Zdanok, 370 530, 581, n. 54, 82 1459, 1489, 671 (1962). Thus, were referring prerequisites alone persuasive testament rule, hearing legislative, I implicitly made understanding source constraint III; would See National Mutual Ins. Tidewater Transfer 337 643, 69 1173, 1208, 93 1556 (1949) (Vinson, dissenting) ("We can review court's among enumerated Art. purely questions"). difficulty concluding "disclaim[ed] divorce," How., basing Constitution.3 B mean retain Other provisions so. I, 8, cl. 9, example, authorizes "[t]o constitute Tribunals inferior supreme Court" 1, states vested Courts ordain establish." "if created, [Congress not] required invest them authorized bestow III." Palmore 411 389, 401, 1670, 1678, 36 342 (1973). 17 position held constant least 1845, "the . (except instances, applicable court) dependent distribution organization, modes exercise, entirely Congress, who possess creating tribunals (inferior Supreme Court) investing concurrent, exclusive, withholding exact degrees character seem good." Cary Curtis, 236, 245, 576. Sheldon Sill, 441, 1147 (1850); Plaquemines Tropical Fruit Henderson, 170 511, 18 685, 42 1126 (1898); Kline Burke Constr. 260 43 79, 67 (1922); Lockerty Phillips, 182, 1019, 1339 (1943). thus turn attention statutes. Judiciary Act 1789 provided circuit cognizance, concurrent several equity, dispute exceeds, exclusive costs, sum value five hundred dollars, alien party, brought, State." Sept. 24, 1789, 11, Stat. 73, 78. (Emphasis added.) key element demarcating until 1948, eliminate stead term actions." Judicial Code Act, 62 930, 19 majority expressly refer statute's use "suits equity." reference, they suggested actions decrees. Stating origin extent [the courts'] settled rules bound them," contended "as England embrace bounded England, respect equally excluded." 605 (Daniel, dissenting). Hence, dissenters' view, relief fall disagree accepting decrees, inferred fairly disagreement centered occasion here join historical debate English handle note commentators found some support majority's interpretation.4 Certainly unprecedented infer, practice, guide meaning Act's grant. See, Robinson Campbell, Wheat. 212, 221-222, 372 (1818). content rest conclusion accuracy justifications seemingly based, apparent years Nizer, Benjamin, Krim Ballon Rosenstiel, 490 509, 514 (CA2 1973) observed, "[m]ore elapsed dictum intimation Congressional dissatisfaction. Whatever permit, accept correct grant." done." 132 (1989). When actions," century-long construed contain matters. With amendment, previously "no changes revision unless make clearly expressed." Fourco Glass Transmirra Products Corp., 353 222, 227, 77 787, 790-791, 786 (1957); Finley 545, 554, 2003, 2009, 104 593 well-known substantive respects, note, presume, intended ibid.; Fed.Rule Civ.Proc. Advisory Committee Note 3, U.S.C.App., p. 555, "adopt[ed] interpretation" reenacted Lorillard Pons, 434 580, 98 866, 870, 55 40 (1978).5 22 100 laid seeds development variety circumstances. supra. Many applications go well circumscribed situations posed progeny. disclaimed narrow range granting intervene rendering orders: 23 "It is, decrees incident, unable husband, interference, decreed; due, always appeal alimony." Id., 591. 24 intend strip persons modification sanctioned enforcement properly obtained Contrary position, validly orders "regulate society" produce "inquisitorial authority" "enter habitations into chambers nurseries private families, inquire pronounce morals habits affections antipathies members every household." 602 And dissent. 604 (noting "[u]pon questions settlement contract connected marriages, undertake contracts, such, independently contracts"). 167, 60, (1899) (stating "[i]t assumed indubitable Circuit claims before court"). 25 Subsequently, expanded include writ habeas corpus, void issued restore father. "As right control possession contested grandfather, regard neither nor special jurisdiction." 594, (1890). Burrus involve understand done, id., interpreted apply equal vigor Bennett Bennett, 221 App.D.C. 90, 93, 682 1039, 1042 (1982); Solomon Solomon, 516 1018, 1025 (CA3 1975); Hernstadt Hernstadt, 373 316, 317 1967); generally 13B C. Wright, Miller, E. Cooper, Practice Procedure 3609, 477-479, nn. 28-32 (1984). application consistent directive 584.6 conclude, therefore, divests Given dissatisfaction, trouble today reaffirming pertains orders. Not rooted long-held understanding, supported considerations. Issuance type infrequently retention deployment social workers monitor compliance. economy, eminently suited work close association local government organizations dedicated handling arise out conflicts expertise, far sense types proficiency past half Lloyd Loeffler, 492. By concluding, do, find decree; rather, alleges Richards. case.7 now whether, proper, sufficient grounds exist warrant IV 29 Appeals, holding. quoted effect " '[a]bstention, designed promote federal-state comity, render disrupt establishment coherent policy." App. Pet. Cert. A-6 (quoting Zaubi Hoejme, 530 F.Supp. 831, 836 (WD Pa. 1980)). It axiomatic, "[a]bstention rule.' Colorado River Water Conservation Dist. 424 800, 813, 96 1236, 1244, 47 483 (1976). Abstention rarely invoked, "virtually unflagging obligation them." 817, S.Ct., 1246. 30 holdings doing, erred. unusual circumstances, criminal prosecution. 755. Though Middlesex County Ethics Comm. Garden Bar Assn., 457 423, 102 2515, 73 Ohio Civil Rights Comm'n Dayton Christian Schools, 477 619, 106 2718, 512 (1986); Pennzoil Texaco 481 107 1519, 95 (1987), Younger's Federalism" assertion important interests made. allegation proceedings, contends proceedings ended filing Absent tribunals, erroneous. 31 inconceivable, 1424 (1943), custody. "difficult problems substantial import whose importance transcends result bar." Dist., U.S., 814, 1244. Such if effectuation depended determination parties. Where, alleged, case.8 V 32 conclude rulings one, spouse sues abused. allegations request hold appropriate diverse pleading amount controversy. Accordingly, reverse remand 33 ordered. 35 agree tort. entertain am agree, "exception" goes remarkable lengths craft simply law. my longstanding, unbroken practice refusing precedent most continued discretionary mandatory For reasons concur holds Ante, Yet appears ambiguous all. extends requisite controversy (emphasis added). 37 absence "clearly expressed" intention ordinarily "conclusive." Consumer Product Safety GTE Sylvania, 447 102, 108, 2051, 2056, 64 766 (1980). apparently discovers history own expressed contrary words First, observes formerly equity" 698. Then interprets read "common cognizable equity. 698-699. points regards "apparent acceptance" 700. Finally, notwithstanding replacement considers evidence "well-known construction" 38 great approach. Starting obvious point, how change anything, expands scope said construction.1 Any inaction part reflects fact, discussed below, likely idea contained 39 leads primary concern: express construe statute—clearly, "cited announcement" 694. puts it, "inferred" declining 699. anything comments dissenting justice rebuttal majority. 699.2 difficult enough arriving unlikely decision. imagine assembled own. event, subsequent seriously undermine inference recognition traces Territory Arizona dismissal bill award counsel fees pendente lite. relations. contrast undertook extensive bases appeal. appellate confined "those cases, only, 60 added).3 Nevertheless, bar jurisdiction.4 distinguished not—indeed, distinguished. territories. reasoned "belongs "[i]n Territories entire dominion sovereignty, national local." 167-168, 60. Today infers plainly rejected. 41 second undermining (1906), Philippine Islands explained exercised finds significant reasons.5 causes, proceedings," 695, opening door easily Instead, explicitly distinguishing pointed need defer States' regulation area context nonstate, court. 308, 486. third ex rel. Popovici Agler, 280 379, 154, 74 489 (1930). Popovici, Roumanian vice-consul He defended grant statutes consuls vice-consuls" vice-consuls." 382-383, 154 1911, c. 231, 1161, 1093). Rejecting claim, Holmes observed unanimous "do affect present true unquestioned three-quarters divorce." 383, 155. traced itself: "If reserved construing instrument accordingly much dealing 'Suits vice-consuls' taken ordinary belonged Courts." 383-384, think implausible believe especially statute.6 ratifying intended. Compare Flood Kuhn, 407 258, 283-284, 92 2099, 2112, 728 (1972) (declining overturn exempting professional baseball antitrust "by positive inaction" allowed stand). 45 Even assuming correctly extension warranted relies denied "jurisdiction" corpus favor recover care child's grandfather. declined statute.7 597, 854. To just "technica[l]" distinction. 703. germane, because, best knowledge, liberty exceptions 46 reject not, My point "jurisdictional" explanation emerges line unreasonable divined sure, old growth decades modern doctrines distinguish refusal altogether. 302-330 (1983) (discussing traditional doctrines). Francis 425 536, 538-539, 1708, 1710, 48 149 (1976) (recognizing "considerations concerns orderly administration require"). concern reflected earlier terms, abstentional—and jurisdictional—in These premised virtually primacy noted above, reference interest territories controlled Government. wholly review. supra (consuls vice-consuls statutes); (habeas corpus). once stated: "The States." 853. Whether justification uncertain expansion area.8 confident, nonetheless, unchallenged War Between very rare continuing significance, moreover, specialized institutions family command abstain, traditionally excluded "rarely invoked." 705. rarer still—and greater affront Congress—should occasions invents there. thing Congress. quite pretext legislated fact did. resolve definitive fashion suggest provide principled disinclination matters.9 49 falls peripherally relations." "Domestic loosely classifiable four categories. "core," category declarations status, marriage, annulment, paternity. "semi-core," rights obligations (or status), support, division property. consists secondary rights, obligations. final, catch-all covers directly nonetheless relate abuse, battering, intentional infliction emotional distress. None consider periphery claim status. upset appurtenant pre-empt Moore Sims, 442 415, 2371, 994 (1979) (applying enjoin authorities). While question presence strongly abstention, Cons. 815, 21, 1245, money All claims. 51 whom THOMAS joins, 52 exceedingly easy case.* opinions, whatever belief existence, origin, exception," However understands 18th-century however construes same. reversed. reason, leave day consideration what, any, principle 53 come exist, represents month action, August juvenile Jefferson Parish, entered State's protection laws, La.Rev.Stat.Ann. 13:1600 et seq. (West 1983), repealed, 1991 La.Acts, 235, 17, eff. Jan. 1992, superseded Louisiana Children's Code, Title X, 1001 (1991), permanently terminating Richards' parental enjoining contact children. Neither necessary pass representation resolving presented; we. diverged U.S.App.D.C. 1039 (1982) (holding injunctive relief); Cole Cole, 633 1083 (CA4 1980) stemming visitation disputes); Drewes Ilnicki, 863 469 (CA6 1988) distress); 694 (CA7 1982) interference child); McIntyre McIntyre, 771 1316 (CA9 1985) alteration state-court impingement supervision minor); Ingram Hayes, 866 368 (CA11 applies divest distress). (1930), accord conclusion. referenced regarding precluded vice-consul. Vestal Foster, Implied Limitations Diversity Jurisdiction Courts, Minn.L.Rev. (1956); Atwood, Domestic Relations Court: Toward Principled Exercise Jurisdiction, Hastings L.J. 571, 584-589 (1984); Rush, Law: Sovereignty Perspective, Notre Dame L.Rev. Note, Exception 83 Colum.L.Rev. 1824, 1834-1839 (1983); Jurisdiction: Re-Evaluation, Boston College 661, 664-668 (1983). BLACKMUN criticizes us resting codification. post, 708-709 (opinion judgment). nothing 2112-2113, (1972). better views similarly narrowly 1316, 1317 Kennedy, J.) ("[T]he arises fix payments support"); F.2d, 492 (same); U.S.App.D.C., 1087 (same). offered explanation, aware none, respondent appear stand opponent insure prompt disposition issue. Kaiser Steel W.S. Ranch 391 593, 88 1753, 1754, 835 (1968). acknowledges invoking speak nevertheless reinterpret 713-716 (BLACKMUN, briefly sketching vision operate, offers authoritative found, retroactively concoct cloth account Railroad Texas Pullman 312 496, 61 85 971 (1941), sounder achieving wholesale Transmerra negate affirmatively authorize recodification approve constructions intimates, ante, 699, 4, good dissent's practice. evidence, unequivocal, suggests matrimonial 489, 491-492 1982); Spindel Spindel, 283 797, 802-803, 806-809 (EDNY 1968); 584-585 "[T]he affirm final judgments includes 'the dispute, exceed thousand dollars.' 166, 59 (citing 1885, 355, 443, "any equity"). mere fact" amount-in-controversy requirement, "a estimated money." 168-169, 60-61. modified award. 172, 62. "both obviously discounted course untenable today. non-monetary above joint actions. 310, 487. At rate, Rama's surely mistaken "has basis" courts." 696-697. overlooks "[w]hen passed sub silentio, considered finally brings us." Hagans Lavine, 415 528, 533, 5, 94 1372, 1377, 5., 577 (1974); Pennhurst School Hosp. Halderman, 465 89, 119, 900, 918, 79 differently. More, Cranch. 159, 397 (1805) (Marshall, C.J.) (statement oral argument). If, plausibly limitations seems highly similar attached appendix opinion, 854, "very instructive" careful able opinion," Matter Barry, Southern York. "res[t] solely law" determinations "devolved high law." 609. Lehman Lycoming Services, 458 502, 524, 3231, 3244, 928 (dissenting opinion) ("Historically, common-law permitted parents obtain vindicating rights"). Victims Child Abuse 4792, 13001 seq.; Family Violence Prevention Services 1757, 10401 Parental Kidnaping 1980, 3568, 1738A; Adoption Assistance Welfare 500, §§ 620-628, 670-679a; Treatment Reform 1978, 205, 5111 5101 Like federal-question "Cases, Equity." Assuming force casts grave doubts ability confer (as 1331) divorces, various "rigid pigeonholes," 1526, Orleans Pub. Serv., Inc. 350, 359, 2506, 2513, 298 (1989), affix label suggest. fully facts us, proceeding. Harlan cautioned ago 'it duty take care, community, hard bad law.' Clark, 49, 696 (1878) (Harlan, East India Paul, Moo. 85, 111, Eng. Rep. 811, 821) (P.C. 1849). observe caution O'Bannon Town Nursing Center, 773, 804, 2467, 2485, 65 506 (1980) judgment) ("easy law"); Burnham Superior Cal., Marin Cty., 495 604, 640, 110 2105, 2126, 631 (1990) (STEVENS, unnecessarily transformed

Classification Label: 1