Magoni-Detwiler v. Pennsylvania
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
EDUARDO C. ROBRENO, District Judge.
Before the Court is defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs amended complaint (doc. no. 15). For the reasons set forth below, the Court finds that, under the teachings of the recent Supreme Court decision in Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp., 544 U.S. 280, 283, 125 S.Ct. 1517, 161 L.Ed.2d 454 (2005), the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not deprive the Court of jurisdiction to entertain plaintiffs due process claim. However, this victory is short-lived. Because the Court finds that under Pennsylvania law Plaintiff is precluded from…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. FeldmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Montana v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Kremer v. Chemical Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Ocasio v. OllsonDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2009
- Loucas v. Cunningham (In re Cunningham)District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2015
- Mathis v. Christian Heating & Air Conditioning, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2014
- KANG HAGGERTY & FETBROYT LLC v. HAYESDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2023
- Shin Da Enterprises Inc. v. XIANG YONGDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2022
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.