Janet Bell v. City of Boise

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the “inextricably intertwined” language does not determine whether a claim is a de facto appeal but is a second and distinct step in the analysis
• finding extrinsic fraud exception applied where plaintiff “did not allege the state court 1 committed legal error, nor did they seek relief from the state court judgment itself.”
• explaining that the “inextricably intertwined” test “is not a test to determine whether a claim is a de facto appeal, but is rather a second and distinct step” in the analysis, such that the Rooker-Feldman inquiry ends if an action does not contain a forbidden de facto appeal
• “Without a direct challenge to a state court’s factual or legal conclusion, Plaintiffs’ suit is not a forbidden de facto appeal, and Rooker-Feldman is inapplicable.”
• a de facto appeal exists when a plaintiff contends there is an erroneous state court decision, and seeks relief from the state court judgment based on that decision
• “To determine whether the Rooker-Feldman bar is applicable, a district court 12 first must determine whether the action contains a forbidden de facto appeal of a state 13 court decision.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).