Nos. 94-1247, 94-1248

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 jurisdiction over plaintiff 's claims because the district court could (and did) find that the claims had merit without also finding that the state court had erred
• “massive absentee ballot fraud, deception, intimidation, harassment and forgery,” and “many of the absentee votes were tainted”
• “[Rejection of a ballot where the voter has been effectively deprived of the ability to cast a legal vote implicates federal due process concerns”
• to protect the integrity of the electoral process a new election is required if it is not feasible to establish the winners of an election
• “To exhaust a habeas claim properly, a petitioner must present his 20 claim to the state supreme court even if that court's review is discretionary.”
• “Pennsylvania law requires that the voter complete the absentee ballot and return it either by mail or in person”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).