Michael Holland v. County of Los Angeles

Good Law
604 F. App'x 543
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 6, 201512-57145California631 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Appellant Michael Holland (Holland) appeals the district court’s dismissal of his action against the County of Los Angeles (County), Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS), and individual DCFS social workers (collectively, Defendants). Holland’s complaint alleges that, in retaliation for authoring a book and threatening to sue DCFS, Defendants falsely and maliciously accused Holland of child abuse, caused his loss of employment, and listed him on the Child Abuse Central Index (CACI), thus violating his civil rights. The district court dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Reviewing the district court’s decision de novo, Carmona v. Carmona, 603 F.3d 1041, 1050 (9th Cir.2010), we reverse because Holland’s action does not present a de facto appeal of a state court decision..

The Rooker-Feldman doctrine bars district court jurisdiction over an action that (1) “contains a forbidden- de facto appeal of a state court decision” and (2) “seek[s] to litigate an issue that is inextricably intertwined with the state court judicial decision from which the forbidden de facto appeal is brought.” Bell v.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.