Case Citator › Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co.

Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co.

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Limited by some courts
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
263 U.S. 413
Decided
Confirmed treatments
2
Flagged citations read
159 of 159
Citing cases (total)
159
Treatment dates
2006–2022
Limited by some courts
At least one reviewed court has limited this case’s holding to narrower facts or a narrower rule. No reviewed court has overruled it. Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co. is limited; all 159 flagged citations have been read. The 2 confirmed adverse treatments are listed below.
Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

159 later cases cite Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co.; 159 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co.?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Limited

  • The Supreme Court held that Rooker-Feldman does not bar a nonparty to the state judgment merely because preclusion law might treat that person as in privity with a state-court party.

    Lance v. Dennis · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    The Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not bar actions by nonparties to the earlier state-court judgment simply because, for purposes of preclusion law, they could be considered in privity with a party to the judgment.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

  • The court confined Rooker-Feldman to state civil judgments and held it inapplicable when the plaintiff's claims implicated an underlying state criminal case.

    Cichocki v. Foxx · N.D. Ill. · filed

    The Rooker-Feldman doctrine provides that “the Supreme Court of the United States is the only federal court that may review judgments entered by state courts in civil litigation.” ... Because Plaintiff's claims implicate his underlying state criminal case, not a civil case, the Rooker-Feldman doctrine is inapplicable here.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co. and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace