MacKenzie v. Donovan

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the plaintiff was effectively asking the federal court to review and rule on the propriety of the state court action and that granting the requested relief would effectively declare the state court order invalid
• holding that the federal claims which arose from state court criminal contempt proceedings were “inextricably intertwined” with the state court action and, thus, the federal district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the claims pursuant to the Rooker-Feldman doctrine
• “Plaintiff’s claims are ‘inextricably intertwined’ with the state court action because granting plaintiff his requested relief would effectively declare the state court order invalid, which this Court is not permitted to do.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).