Reusser v. Wachovia Bank, N.A.

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 Rooker–Feldman doctrine barred plaintiffs’ extrinsic fraud claim that was presented to, and rejected by, state courts
• holding that a de facto appeal exists where the federal claims are “inextricably intertwined” with the state court ruling
• concluding that claims alleging an illegal act by the adverse party were barred under Rooker-Feldman because the claims were “separately litigated before and rejected” by the state court
• holding that the Rooker–Feldman doctrine barred review of a claim of extrinsic fraud because that claim “was itself separately litigated before and rejected by” the state court (emphasis omitted)
• observing that bankruptcy courts’ jurisdiction extends to “ ‘all matters connected with the bankruptcy estate’ ”
• observing that bankruptcy courts’ jurisdiction extends to “ ‘all matters connected with the bank- ruptcy estate’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).