Legal Opinion

Moore v. Idealease of Wilmington

District Court, E.D. North Carolina

Decided November 21, 2006No. 7:06 CV 37 DPublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

DEVER, District Judge.

On March 22, 2006, Katherine Bell Moore (“Moore” or “plaintiff’) filed suit against Idealease of Wilmington (“Ideal-ease”) and Idealease’s president Stewart Brown (collectively “defendants”), alleging violations of 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1982 and the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments to the United States Constitution. On August 8, 2006, the court ordered the parties to brief whether the Rooker-Feld-man doctrine required dismissal of the complaint. The parties have responded. As explained below, pursuant to the Rook-er-Feldman doctrine, the complaint is dismissed…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better EnvironmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  2. District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. FeldmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  3. Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
  4. Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2005
  5. Johnson v. De GrandySupreme Court of the United States · 1994

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Thomas v. HaslamDistrict Court, M.D. Tennessee · 2018
  2. Thomas v. HaslamDistrict Court, M.D. Tennessee · 2018
  3. Brown v. Nationstar Mortgage LLCDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2025
  4. C. P. v. DoeDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · 2019
  5. Hesed-El v. DoeDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · 2020

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API