Ashmore v. Hannen

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• dismissing plaintiffs’ claims under Rooker-Feldman after plaintiffs lost in state court twice before asking federal court to review and reject a foreclosure judgment
• “In the absence of subject matter jurisdiction, the Court need not decide whether the Complaint states any viable claims.” (citation omitted)
• “Even where a plaintiff alleges that a state court judgment was procured by fraud, Rooker–Feldman will divest the federal court of jurisdiction.”
• “Even with the Court’s exercise of leniency toward pro se litigants, affording them ‘special solicitude,’ as directed by the Second Circuit, pro se litigants are expected to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.” (citations omitted)
• “Even with the Court’s exercise of leniency toward pro se litigants, affording them ‘special solicitude,’ as directed by the Second Circuit, pro se litigants are expected to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.” (citations omitted)
• \Courts in this Circuit have consistently held that any attack on a judgment of foreclosure is clearly barred by the Rooker - Feldman [D]octrine.\ (quoting Gunn v. Ambac Assurance Corp. , No. 11-cv-5497, 2012 WL 2401649 , at (S.D.N.Y. June 26, 2012) ) (collecting cases

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).