Napolitano

Doe & Associates Law Offices v. Napolitano

Good Law
252 F.3d 1026
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 23, 2001Nos. 99-15797 99-17464California1,752 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Schroeder, J.

ORDER AND OPINION

ORDER

The plaintiff-appellant’s amended emergency motion to seal and depublish opinion filed April 23, 2001, is GRANTED IN PART. It is ordered that the opinion issued on April 23, 2001, is removed from publication. The attached opinion is published in its stead. The Clerk’s office shall modify the docket.

The plaintiff-appellant’s emergency motion to seal and depublish opinion is otherwise DENIED.

It is so ordered.

OPINION

The law firm of Doe & Associates 1 appeals from the district court’s denial of jurisdiction over Doe’s constitutional challenge to a state grand jury subpoena duces tecum that Doe contends compelled the disclosure of confidential client information. The firm had unsuccessfully challenged the subpoena through the state appellate courts. The district court denied jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, which precludes federal court review of state court judgments other than review by the Supreme Court on certiora-ri, since the state court had considered and rejected the firm’s constitutional arguments. See Rooker v. Fid. Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413 , 44 S.Ct. 149 , 68 L.Ed. 362 (1923); D.C. Ct. of App. v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462 , 103…

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.