Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8647329
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Mooney v. Boli
No. 8647329 · Decided January 24, 2008
No. 8647329·Ninth Circuit · 2008·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
January 24, 2008
Citation
No. 8647329
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Shawn Karl Mooney appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging a conspiracy to violate his due process rights in connection with an action that he brought in state court. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a district court’s dismissal based on the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Noel v. Hall, 341 F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir.2003). We affirm. The district court properly concluded that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine barred Mooney’s action because it is a “forbidden de facto appeal” of a state court decision, and raises constitutional claims that are “inextricably intertwined” with that prior state court decision. Id. at 1158 . Mooney’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive. AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Shawn Karl Mooney appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his action under 42 U.S.C.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Shawn Karl Mooney appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his action under 42 U.S.C.
02§ 1983 alleging a conspiracy to violate his due process rights in connection with an action that he brought in state court.
03We review de novo a district court’s dismissal based on the Rooker-Feldman doctrine.
04The district court properly concluded that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine barred Mooney’s action because it is a “forbidden de facto appeal” of a state court decision, and raises constitutional claims that are “inextricably intertwined” with t
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Shawn Karl Mooney appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his action under 42 U.S.C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Mooney v. Boli in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on January 24, 2008.
Use the citation No. 8647329 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.