Brud Rossman v. Elizabeth Wingo

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ____________

No. 20-7053 September Term, 2020 1:20-cv-01155-UNA Filed On: December 3, 2020 Brud Rudolph Rossman, Esquire,

Appellant v.

Elizabeth Wingo, Judge, D.C. Superior Court

D.C. Courthouse, et al.,

Appellees

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

BEFORE: Rogers and Walker, Circuit Judges; Sentelle, Senior Circuit Judge 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Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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

FOR THE COURT: Mark J. Langer, Clerk BY: /s/ Michael C. McGrail Deputy Clerk