Ysais v. Children Youth & Family Department , 353 F. App'x 159 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                                                                          FILED
    United States Court of Appeals
    Tenth Circuit
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    November 24, 2009
    FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
    Elisabeth A. Shumaker
    Clerk of Court
    CHRISTOPHER YNOSENCIO
    YSAIS,
    Plaintiff–Appellant,
    v.                                                     No. 09-2125
    (D.C. No. 1:08-CV-00595-MV-DJS)
    CHILDREN YOUTH AND FAMILY                               (D. N.M.)
    DEPARTMENT; JENNIFER LYNN,
    as an employee of CYFD, and as an
    individual; HAVEN HOUSE, as an
    individual; DIANA TORRANCE, as
    the director of Haven House, and as
    an individual; STATE OF
    NEW MEXICO,
    Defendants–Appellees.
    ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
    Before LUCERO, GORSUCH, and HOLMES, Circuit Judges.
    *
    After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
    unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of
    this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is
    therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is
    not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata,
    and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value
    consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
    The district court dismissed Christopher Ynosencio Ysais’ civil-rights
    claims under the abstention doctrine of Younger v. Harris, 
    401 U.S. 37
     (1971),
    and under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1915
    (e)(2)(B) for failure to state a claim and for seeking
    damages from state employees with immunity from monetary relief. We agree
    with the analysis of the district court and dismiss the appeal as frivolous.
    This case arises from ongoing child-custody proceedings in state court and
    a state criminal action for alleged child abuse (which apparently terminated in
    favor of Ysais). Ysais complains that state authorities, including defendant
    Jennifer Lynn, alleged child abuse without conducting a proper investigation,
    produced misleading evidence, resisted his request for the presence of an attorney
    at an interview, and improperly required him to attend domestic-violence and
    parenting classes. Further, he asserts that Haven House, through defendant Diana
    Torrance, provided therapeutic services to his son without his consent and refused
    to provide him with his son’s records.
    Ysais bases his federal claims on the theory that defendants violated his
    property rights, interfered with his family relations, discriminated against him as
    a Hispanic single father, and conspired to terminate his parental rights. The
    complaint also sets forth state claims of outrageous conduct, defamation,
    false-light invasion of privacy, and “corruption.” Ysais seeks injunctive relief in
    connection with the state-court custody proceedings and also damages from
    defendants.
    -2-
    The district court first determined that the Younger abstention doctrine
    barred its consideration of Ysais’ claims. We agree. In the absence of
    extraordinary circumstances, the Younger doctrine directs federal courts to refrain
    from interfering in ongoing state civil proceedings. Morrow v. Winslow, 
    94 F.3d 1386
    , 1393 (10th Cir. 1996). The comity considerations of the doctrine are
    particularly vital in “child custody proceedings[, which] are an especially delicate
    subject of state policy.” 
    Id.
    Because Ysais asked to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), the district court
    also reviewed the complaint under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1915
    (e), which requires dismissal
    of an IFP claim that: “(i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on
    which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant
    who is immune from such relief.” § 1915(e)(2)(B). The district court concluded
    that, under these standards, Ysais’ federal claims must be dismissed. It declined
    to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state claims. Later, the district
    court denied Ysais’ motion for reconsideration of its rulings. We agree with the
    district court’s analysis.
    -3-
    Having reviewed Ysais’ submissions and the record on appeal in light of
    the governing law, we DISMISS this appeal as frivolous. All pending motions
    are DENIED.
    ENTERED FOR THE COURT
    Carlos F. Lucero
    Circuit Judge
    -4-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 09-2125

Citation Numbers: 353 F. App'x 159

Judges: Gorsuch, Holmes, Lucero

Filed Date: 11/24/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/3/2023