From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Safapou v. Marin Cnty.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Dec 17, 2019
No. 18-15387 (9th Cir. Dec. 17, 2019)

Opinion

No. 18-15387

12-17-2019

CHERIE SAFAPOU, individually, and as the parent and natural guardian of J.S.D., a minor, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MARIN COUNTY, California; et al., Defendants-Appellees.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION

D.C. No. 4:17-cv-07042-PJH MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California
Phyllis J. Hamilton, District Judge, Presiding Before: WALLACE, CANBY, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Cherie Safapou appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal and state law claims arising out of state court divorce, custody, and restraining order proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)); Noel v. Hall, 341 F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir. 2003) (dismissal under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Safapou's action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because it is a "forbidden de facto appeal" of state court divorce, custody, and restraining orders, and raises issues that are "inextricably intertwined" with those orders. Noel, 341 F.3d at 1158, 1163; see also Cooper v. Ramos, 704 F.3d 772, 779 (9th Cir. 2012) (claims are "inextricably intertwined" for purposes of the Rooker-Feldman doctrine where "the relief requested in the federal action would effectively reverse the state court decision or void its ruling" (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); Carmona v. Carmona, 603 F.3d 1041, 1050-51 (9th Cir. 2010) (Rooker-Feldman doctrine barred plaintiff's claims seeking to enjoin state family court orders).

We do not consider documents not filed with the district court, see United States v. Elias, 921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990), or matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Safapou v. Marin Cnty.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Dec 17, 2019
No. 18-15387 (9th Cir. Dec. 17, 2019)
Case details for

Safapou v. Marin Cnty.

Case Details

Full title:CHERIE SAFAPOU, individually, and as the parent and natural guardian of…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Dec 17, 2019

Citations

No. 18-15387 (9th Cir. Dec. 17, 2019)