United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division
December 15, 2005.
WALTER WELLS, Plaintiff,
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.
© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.