Gregory Garmong v. Supreme Court of Nevada, et al.

The Court of Appeals of the Ninth Circuit affirmed an order of the District Court of Nevada, dismissing a federal civil-rights Complaint made under 42 U.S.C. §1983, solely on the ground that the federal civil-rights action was barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. The civil-rights Complaint alleged that the Defendant Nevada Supreme Court had denied Petitioner his civil rights during the course of underlying state actions, and sought recovery solely on that basis. The civilrights Complaint did not seek "review and rejection" of the judgments of the state actions, the criterion for application of Rooker-Feldman established by Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp., 544 U.S. 280 (2005). Accordingly, the question presented is: Whether the Ninth Circuit may ignore and refuse to follow this Court's precedent in application of the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, which requires that the federal court determine whether the federal civilrights Complaint seeks "review and rejection" of the underlying state-court judgments, and on that basis affirm the dismissal of the civil-rights Complaint. This Question goes to the very heart of this Court's authority as the highest court of the land. The Ninth Circuit, both in panel and en banc, was made fully aware of this Court's controlling precedent, but refused not only to follow Exxon but also to even acknowledge I .