ROSSMAN v. WINGO (2020)

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Brud Rudolph ROSSMAN, Esquire, Appellant v. Elizabeth WINGO, Judge, D.C. Superior Court D.C. Courthouse, et al., Appellees

No. 20-7053

Decided: December 03, 2020

BEFORE: Rogers and Walker, Circuit Judges; Sentelle, Senior Circuit Judge

Brad Rudolph Rossman, Pro Se

JUDGMENT

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the briefs and appendix filed by appellant. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C. Cir. Rule 34(j). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court's order, filed May 27, 2020, be affirmed. The district court correctly concluded that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction over appellant's complaint. See Gray v. Poole, 275 F.3d 1113, 1119 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (“The Rooker-Feldman doctrine prevents lower federal courts from hearing cases that amount to the functional equivalent of an appeal from a state court.”).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R. App. P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.

Per Curiam

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law