Golden v. HELEN SIGMAN & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Rooker-Feldman barred review of claims related to a state court divorce and child custody proceeding
• holding that Rooker-Feldman barred review of claims related to a state court divorce and child custody proceedings
• holding that Rooker-Feldman applied to § 1983 claims against child representative based on biased advocacy because the alleged harms “flow[ed] directly from the fruit of [the defendant’s] efforts: state-court custody orders favorable to [plaintiff’s ex-spouse]”
• finding that a child representative who allegedly made false statements on matters related to a custody proceeding “was still carrying out her responsibilities as a child representative”
• dismissing claim that “lack[ed] the factual specificity required to raise it above the speculative level”
• federal court lacked jurisdiction to hear claim based on injuries caused by state-court custody orders unfavorable to plaintiff

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).