Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

In Re Robert Sarhan, et ux.

Paid petition


Certiorari denied · October 5, 2020
Pre-decision estimate: 0% cert probability

Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.

Question presented

Should a writ of mandamus be issued to the Eleventh Circuit, requiring it (A) to disregard matters dehors the record, (B) to rule without regard to matters dehors the record, (C) to reverse the order of the district court,

  1. which granted a motion to dismiss the complaint based on a matter, which was: (i) outside the “four corners” of the complaint, and (ii) dehors the record, and

  2. which disallowed requested relief from a state-court judgment under the RookerFeldman Doctrine, where the judgment was entered: (a) without notice to Anabella Soury, (b) without affording to her an opportunity (i) to appeal or (ii) to be heard on the due-process violations, and (c) without affording to Robert Sarhan an opportunity to be heard on those due-process arguments, and (D) Mandating that the district court accept jurisdiction to grant relief from the state court judgment in regard to the due-process challenges to that judgment that the state court would not hear, notwithstanding the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine? (E) Is mandamus available to mandate relief from orders that recite reliance on items dehors the record and violate the ministerial duty to rule just on items within the record? (F) Is mandamus available to mandate relief from an order of dismissal of a complaint that recites reliance on items dehors the “four corners” of the complaint and violate the ministerial duty to rule just on items within those four corners? (G) Is mandamus available to mandate that the court take jurisdiction where it declined to do so because of a misinterpretation of the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine? (H) Is a judgment of foreclosure against Anabella Soury and Robert Sarhan, as owners of the foreclosed property, a denial of due process where that judgment was entered without serving, and without notice to, Anabella Soury or her attorney and without affording to Robert Sarhan an opportunity to be heard? Should a writ of prohibition be issued to the Eleventh Circuit, prohibiting it: (I) From considering any matters dehors the record, and

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Arthur Joseph Morburger
Arthur Morburger, Esq.

For respondent
Raul Gastesi Jr.
Gastesi Lopez & Mestre, P.L.L.C

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference

Proceedings

  1. Oct 05 2020
    Petition DENIED.
  2. Jul 01 2020
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
  3. Jun 23 2020
    Reply of petitioners Robert Sarhan, et ux. filed. (Distributed)
  4. Jun 12 2020
    Brief of respondent H&H Investors, Inc. in opposition filed.
  5. Apr 28 2020
    Petition for a writ of mandamus and/or prohibition filed. (Response due June 12, 2020)