You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Krause v. Hiroshige

Citation: 78 F. App'x 602Docket: No. 03-55360; D.C. No. CV-02-07180-JFW

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; October 17, 2003; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Waltraud Krause appeals the district court's dismissal of her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Ernest M. Hiroshige, which was dismissed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The dismissal was based on the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, which prohibits federal district courts from reviewing state court judgments. Key cases cited include District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, Worldwide Church of God v. McNair, and Branson v. Nott. The appellate court affirmed the district court's decision, noted that the disposition is not suitable for publication and cannot be cited except as allowed by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3, granted Krause's request for judicial notice, and denied her motion to strike.

Legal Issues Addressed

Judicial Notice

Application: The appellate court granted Krause's request for judicial notice, indicating the acceptance of certain facts without requiring formal evidence.

Reasoning: The appellate court...granted Krause's request for judicial notice...

Motion to Strike

Application: The appellate court denied Krause's motion to strike, indicating that the request to remove certain material from the record was not granted.

Reasoning: ...and denied her motion to strike.

Non-Publication and Citation of Dispositions

Application: The appellate court noted that the disposition is not suitable for publication and cannot be cited, except as allowed by a specific rule.

Reasoning: The appellate court affirmed the district court's decision, noted that the disposition is not suitable for publication and cannot be cited except as allowed by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3...

Rooker-Feldman Doctrine

Application: The federal district court dismissed the case based on the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, which prevents federal district courts from reviewing state court judgments.

Reasoning: The dismissal was based on the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, which prohibits federal district courts from reviewing state court judgments.