Henrichs

Henrichs v. Valley View Development

Good Law
474 F.3d 609·2007 WL 92675
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 16, 200704-56470California2,959 words

Opinion

Opinion

McKEOWN, J.

This appeal stems from a quiet title action that began in Los Angeles Superior Court but was resuscitated in federal court after the California courts ruled against appellants John and Anne Henrichs (“Hen-richs”) on all issues. We consider whether the district court had subject matter jurisdiction over Henrichs’ claims arising from a California state court judgment rendered against him. After a series of real estate transactions among Henrichs, Valley View Development (“Valley View”), Marc Gel-man, Michael Blaha, and Granada Plaza Associates (“GPA”) turned sour, Valley View filed a claim to quiet title in Los Angeles County Superior Court. Henrichs cross-claimed, alleging breach of contract and indemnification claims. The Superior Court, the California Court of Appeal, and the California Supreme Court all held in favor of Valley View and denied Henrichs relief on all claims.

Having extinguished all avenues for relief in the California courts, Henrichs filed suit in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The district court held that it lacked jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine to review the> state court judgment and Henrichs’…

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.