Gossage

Gossage v. Washington

Good Law
91 F. App'x 593
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 23, 2004No. 03-35588California288 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Henry Gossage appeals pro se the district court’s order granting the defendants’ motion for summary judgment, denying Gossage’s cross-motion for summary judgment, and dismissing the action. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review summary judgment de novo. Collings v. Longview Fibre Co., 63 F.3d 828, 831 (9th Cir.1995). We vacate and remand.

The district court dismissed the majority of Gossage’s federal claims pursuant to the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, reasoning that they were “inextricably intertwined with the state law issues decided by the Washington state courts.” Following this, we issued our opinion in Noel v. Hall, 341 F.3d 1148 (9th Cir.2003), in which we clarified application of the Rooker-Feldman doctrine in this circuit. We held in Noel that “[ojnly when there is already a forbidden de facto appeal in federal court does the ‘inextricably intertwined’ test come into play.” Id. at 1158 . Such a de facto appeal arises only “when the plaintiff in federal district court complains of a legal wrong allegedly committed by the state court, and seeks relief from the judgment of that court.” Id. at 1163 .

Here, Gossage does not assert “as a…

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.