Gresham v. Baltimore Police Dept.

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 did not bar plaintiff’s allegation that he lost in state court because of a conspiracy among the judges and lawyers
• stating that when recovery on a claim would effectively invalidate a conviction, without an express request for vacatur, the claim would not trigger the Rooker-Feldman doctrine
• recognizing judicial defendants were entitled to have suit dismissed on grounds of immunity in case alleging “massive, tentacular conspiracy among the lawyers and the judges to engineer” plaintiff’s defeat
• concluding claim “that the [state-court] judge was a cat’s paw of the winning party’s lawyers” i.e., “that people involved in the decision violated some independent right of his, such as the right (if it is a right
• ‘When a plaintiff seeks to relitigate a suit that has been decided against him, he is not so much attacking as trying to bypass the judgment in that suit; and the doctrine that blocks him is res judicata.”
• “When a plaintiff seeks to relitigate a suit that has been decided against him, he is not so much attacking as trying to bypass the judgment in that suit; and the doctrine that blocks him is res judicata.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).