POE ET AL.
v.
GERSTEIN ET AL.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A three-judge District Court held unconstitutional a Florida statute requiring spousal consent for married women's abortions and parental consent for unmarried minors seeking abortion, but declined to issue an injunction against enforcement, assuming the state would respect the declaratory judgment. The Supreme Court affirmed the refusal to issue an injunction, holding that absent proof that state officials would not comply with the declaration of unconstitutionality, an injunction was not necessary.
[1] A federal court may decline to issue an injunction against a statute if there is no allegation or proof that the state will not acquiesce in a declaratory judgment holdin…
[2] A court's refusal to issue an injunction may be affirmed even if the propriety of a declaratory judgment is not addressed.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Per Curiam.
A three-judge District Court entered a declaratory judgment holding unconstitutional a Florida statute, Fla. Stat. Ann. §458.22 (3) (Supp. 1974-1975), which forbids an abortion without the consent of the husband, if the woman is married, and if unmarried and under the age of 18, without the consent of a parent. Because it was anticipated that the State would respect the declaratory judgment, the court declined to issue an injunction against the enforcement of the statute. The plaintiffs in the District Court are appellants here and challenge the refusal to issue the injunction. The judgment of the District Court is affirmed in this respect. Whether or not the declaratory judgment was itself properly issued, a question on which we intimate no opinion, the District Court properly refused to issue the injunction; for there was “no allegation here and no proof that respondents would not, nor can we assume that they will not, acquiesce in the decision . . . holding the challenged ordinance unconstitutional.” Douglas v. City of Jeannette, 319 U. S. 157, 165 (1943).
This aspect of Douglas v. City of Jeannette has been repeatedly recognized in later cases. Dombrowski v. Pfister, 380 U. S. 479, 484-485 (1965); Zwickler v. Koota, 389 U. S. 241, 253-254 (1967); Roe v. Wade, 410 U. S. 113, 166-167 (1973).
It is unnecessary to deal separately with the question whether the District Court was correct in denying intervention in the District Court to other parties who are appellants here; for assuming they are to be considered proper parties in the District Court and in this Court, we would affirm the denial of the injunction as to them for the same reasons we affirm the denial of such relief to appellants who were plaintiffs below.
So ordered.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
DiNATALE v. Robert A. Lieberman, M.D., 409 So. 2d 512 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)…tion here. It was passed to replace a prior provision requiring the husband’s consent to an abortion, which was declared unconstitutional in Coe v. Gerstein, 376 F.Supp. 695 (S.D.Fla.1973) aff’d, 517 F. 2d 787 (5th Cir. 1975), affm’d., 428 U.S. 901, 94 S.Ct. 2247, 41 L.Ed.2d 70 (1976).…
-
Nat'l Welf. Rights Org. v. Mathews, 533 F.2d 637 (D.C. Cir. 1976)…ions underlying the decisions of the Secretary. For these reasons, we remand the case to the district court for the entry of a judgment declaring the regulation invalid. Injunctive relief does not appear to be required at this time. Poe v. Gerstein, 417 U.S. 281, 94 S.Ct. 2247, 41 L.Ed.2d 70 (1974). So ordered. . The proposed regulation differed from the final regulation in that it exempted the entire value of the home for adult recipients and allowed no exemption for a motor vehicle owned by an AFDC fami…
-
POE v. Gerstein, 517 F.2d 787 (5th Cir. 1975)…tion, the Court advising that the declaratory judgment was appealable to the court of appeals, Gerstein v. Coe, 417 U.S. 279, 94 S.Ct. 2246, 41 L.Ed.2d 68 (1974), and the district court’s refusal to grant an injunction was affirmed, Poe v. Gerstein, 417 U.S. 281, 94 S.Ct. 2247, 41 L.Ed.2d 70 (1974). The state’s appeal of the district court’s declaratory judgment is now before this court. II. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 153-56, 93 S.Ct. 705, 35 L.Ed.2d 147 (1973) held, of course, that the woman’s right to…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- ROE v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (U.S. 1973)
- Dombrowski v. Pfister, 380 U.S. 479 (U.S. 1965)
- Zwickler v. Koota, 389 U.S. 241 (U.S. 1967)
- Douglas v. City OF Jeannette, 319 U.S. 157 (U.S. 1943)