Campbell

MEMORANDUM **

*895 Larry Campbell appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his action contesting a state court’s attorney’s fees order in a domestic relations matter. The district court found that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the case because (1) the complaint essentially sought review of a state court order for- attorney’s fees and (2) the attorney’s fee order was entered in the context of a marital dissolution proceeding. We affirm.

Campbell’s case fits squarely within the types of case barred by Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413 , 44 S.Ct. 149 , 68 L.Ed. 362 (1923). Campbell requested that the district court declare the attorneys’ fee award erroneous, order a new hearing and/or trial, and enjoin the any state court restraining order which ordered Campbell not to contact opposing counsel. Campbell’s federal suit is a forbidden de facto appeal of state court judgments, see Noel v. Hall, 341 F.3d 1148, 1155-56 (9th Cir.2003), and the district properly dismissed the action.

The district court also properly abstained from hearing this case on the ground that it essentially sought review of a domestic relations case. See Newdow v. Elk Grove…