Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

WELLS v. CITY OF CHICAGO

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division


December 15, 2005.

WALTER WELLS, Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF CHICAGO and DANIEL FERNANDEZ, Defendants.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: JAMES MORAN, Senior District Judge

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

We earlier dismissed some claims but refused to dismiss one because we could not conclude, solely from the pleadings, that the house was demolished pursuant to a demolition order entered by the state court. Defendant Fernandez now moves for summary judgment and that motion is granted.

The submissions make it abundantly clear that the dispute had a long and tangled history in state court. Ultimately, the state court concluded that plaintiff had not established an ownership interest and that the property should be demolished. Plaintiff contends the state court was wrong about the ownership interest and about the need for demolition. But he did not appeal and the Rooker-Feldman doctrine precludes him from overturning that decision in federal court. Fredericksen v. L.A. Demolition, Inc., 54 Fed.App. 858 (8th Cir. 2002); Talano v. City of Lockport, 6 Fed.App. 450 (7th Cir. 2001).

  We thank appointed counsel for his dedicated service.

20051215

© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.