Case ID: f-appx_25/html/0011-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Lila S. MONELL and Damon Cummings, Plaintiffs, Appellants, v. The BEVERLY HOSPITAL, Northeast Health Systems, Inc., and Thomas F. Reilly, Attorney General of Massachusetts, Defendants, Appellees.
    No. 01-1638.
    United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit.
    Feb. 7, 2002.
    Robert S. Wolfe, with whom Robert Wolfe Associates, P.C. was on brief, for appellants.
    Robert M. Buchanan, Jr., with whom Choate, Hall & Stewart was on brief, for The Beverly Hospital and Northeast Health Systems, Inc., appellees.
    John R. Hitt, Assistant Attorney General, with whom Thomas F. Reilly, Attorney General, was on brief, for the Attorney General, appellee.
    Before BOUDIN, Chief Judge, LIPEZ, Circuit Judge, and BOWNES, Senior Circuit Judge.
   PER CURIAM.

We affirm the district court on the basis of its decision on the merits of the plaintiff-appellants’ claims. We have considered sua sponte whether the Rooker-Feldman doctrine or Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env’t, 523 U.S. 83, 101, 118 S.Ct. 1003, 140 L.Ed.2d 210 (1998), precluded the district court from reaching the merits, and concluded that they did not.

We deny the appellees’ motion for sanctions in the form of damages and costs on appeal. There is no evidence or even a suggestion that the appeal was prompted by malice or bad faith. And while we do not consider the merits close, neither are we prepared to say that the appeal was wholly frivolous. The usual appeal costs shall be awarded to appellees.

Affirmed.