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.
Read Medical Dev. Int’l. v. Cal. Dept. of Corr., No. 08-15759
Appellate Information
Argued and Submitted July 16, 2009
Filed October 30, 2009
Judges
Opinion by Judge Clifton
Counsel
For Appellant:
Bennett J. Lee and Garrett E. Dillon, Watt, Tieder, Hoffar & Fitzgerald, LLP, San Francisco, CA
For Appellee:
Michelle M. Mitchell, Deputy Attorney General, Sacramento, CA
Martin H. Dodd, Futterman & Dupree LLP, San Francisco, CA
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Civil Rights
Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Criminal
Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records
Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules
