Milligan

Milligan v. City of Chandler

Good Law
135 F. App'x 7
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 7, 2005No. 04-15910California419 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*8 MEMORANDUM **

Michael Milligan appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment for defendants in his action against city, county, and state officials alleging that improper zoning citations issued against him and subsequent state court proceedings violated his constitutional rights and state tort law. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s grant of summary judgment, Noel v. Hall, 341 F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir.2003), and may affirm on any ground supported by the record, Oscar v. Univ. Students Co-op. Ass’n, 965 F.2d 783, 785 (9th Cir.1992).

The district court erred in concluding that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine barred the constitutional claims arising out of Milligan’s state court proceedings because Milligan alleged that the defendants misrepresented facts so that an injunction would be issued against him. See Noel, 341 F.3d at 1163 (indicating that “where the federal plaintiff does not complain of a legal injury caused by a state court judgment, but rather of a legal injury caused by an adverse party, Rooker-Feldman does not bar jurisdiction.”).

The district court also erred in concluding that Milligan failed to…

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.