Case Citator › District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman

District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman

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
460 U.S. 462
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
170 of 170
Citing cases (total)
7,189
Treatment dates
2005
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. District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman is limited. Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp. confined the Rooker–Feldman doctrine to suits brought by state-court losers complaining of injuries caused by earlier state-court judgments and seeking district-court review and rejection of those judgments.
More on how this was screened

All 170 flagged citations have been read, and the one confirmed treatment is listed below. The other opinions applied the post-Exxon rule, applied Feldman's own judgment-versus-rule distinction, rejected expansive arguments, or contained unrelated treatment language.

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.

7,189 later cases cite District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman; 170 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 District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman?

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 Court confined the Rooker–Feldman doctrine to federal suits by state-court losers seeking review and rejection of earlier state-court judgments.

    Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp. · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    The Rooker-Feldman doctrine, we hold today, is confined to cases of the kind from which the doctrine acquired its name: cases brought by state-court losers complaining of injuries caused by state-court judgments rendered before the district court proceedings commenced and inviting district court review and rejection of those judgments. Rooker-Feldman does not otherwise override or supplant preclusion doctrine or augment the circumscribed doctrines that allow federal courts to stay or dismiss proceedings in deference to state-court actions.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman 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