- Case Type:
- Case Status:
- 17-1916 (1st Circuit, Oct 19,2018) Published
- The First Circuit affirmed the District Court's dismissal based on the Rooker-Feldman doctrine.
- Procedural context:
- Appeal from the District Court's dismissal based on the Rooker-Feldman doctrine.
- Klimowitz, "the plaintiff, fought tooth and nail in the Massachusetts state courts and lost. Displeased by the result of the state-court proceedings, she repaired to the federal district court and sought to have that court address essentially the same grievances. The district court rejected her importunings." She had litigated the propriety of the defendant's foreclosure in Housing Court, to no avail. The decision does not say why she lost in Housing Court. NOTE: the decision also refers talks about the Service Members action in Land Court, and errs in saying that that action resulted in a judgment of foreclosure. This is error because the Servicemembers Action is >not< a part of the foreclosure process, see HSBC BANK USA, NA v. Matt, 464 Mass. 193 - Mass: Supreme Judicial Court 2013, and unless a mortgagor is a Service Member, he has no standing to participate in the Service Members action. Id. Given that error, the decision is of limited utility, but the discussion of the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine is useful. Also, the connection to bankruptcy is somewhat tenuous; the original mortgagee, New Century, filed a bankruptcy case.
- Selya (author), Lynch & Thompson
Singh v, Singh (In re Singh)
Summarizing by Bradley Pearce
2877 in the system
12 Being Processed