Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
In an action to recover payment for medical care provided to prisoners, the removal of the action to the district court is affirmed where the suit was against a federally-appointed receiver and the district court thus had clear jurisdiction over the matter. However, the order dismissing the action is vacated where: 1) plaintiff was not required to obtain permission from the district court to sue defendant-receiver because the action fit within the statutory exception to the general rule requiring an appointing court's permission before suing a receiver in another jurisdiction; and 2) the receiver was not absolutely immune from suit.
Argued and Submitted July 16, 2009
Filed October 30, 2009
Opinion by Judge Clifton
Martin H. Dodd, Futterman & Dupree LLP, San Francisco, CA
Sign into your Legal Forms and Services account to manage your estate planning documents.Sign In
Create an account allows to take advantage of these benefits: