Case Explained: BENSON V. LINVILLE, ET AL.

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-29 Docket: 8:26-cv-00451-MRA- The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of David Allen Benson’s motion for a preliminary injunction in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action seeking to enjoin pending state criminal proceedings against him. The court held that under the *Younger* abstention doctrine, the district court was required to refrain from interfering with active state criminal cases and determined that Benson failed to demonstrate that any recognized exception to this doctrine applied. Specifically, the court rejected Benson’s allegations of judicial bias as unsupported by the record, citing *Liteky v. United States* for the principle that judicial rulings alone rarely support such claims. The practical consequence is that the injunction request remains denied, allowing the state criminal proceedings to continue without federal interference. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.