Background
Tony A. Berger appealed pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging federal and state law claims against various defendants, including a judge and private individuals.
The court’s reasoning
The Ninth Circuit reviewed the dismissal de novo. The court held that the district court properly dismissed Berger’s claims against Judge Trevor J Ward for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine because the claims were a de facto appeal of a prior state court judgment and were inextricably intertwined with that judgment. The court also affirmed the dismissal of contract and Fourteenth Amendment claims against the Shopas. The dismissal of Berger’s Monell claim was proper because he failed to allege facts sufficient to show any unconstitutional policy or practice. Finally, the court affirmed the dismissal of claims against Bounds and Shelton because Berger lacked standing to compel the investigation or prosecution of another person.
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces the Rooker-Feldman doctrine as a bar to federal litigation that seeks to overturn state court judgments and clarifies standing requirements for plaintiffs attempting to compel law enforcement action.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download