Mojallali
Mojallali v. County of Los Angeles
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Kourosh Mojallali’s parents and his estate appeal the district court’s dismissal of their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. We hold that the district court lacked jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine to hear the parents’ claims, and we affirm the district court’s dismissal of the estate’s claims on statute of limitations grounds.
The parents and the estate previously brought their claims against these defendants in California state court, and the court dismissed the parents’ claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Under California law, this judgment was a judgment on the merits. See Crowley v. Modern Faucet Mfg. Co., 44 Cal.2d 321 , 282 P.2d 33, 34 (Cal.1955). Because the parents’ “federal claim succeeds only to the extent that the state court wrongly deeid *727 ed the issue before it,” Pennzoil v. Texaco, Inc., 481 U.S. 1, 25 , 107 S.Ct. 1519 , 95 L.Ed.2d 1 (1987) (Marshall, J., concurring), the district court lacked jurisdiction to hear these claims. See District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 482 , 103 S.Ct. 1303 , 75 L.Ed.2d 206 (1983) (“a United…