Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-02302/USCOURTS-ca8-04-02302-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 

---

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-2302

___________

Joseph D. Thornblad, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the 

* District of Minnesota.

Linda Anderson, Commissioner of *

Human Services; Kathy Meade * [UNPUBLISHED]

Hebert, Minnesota State Attorney *

General’s Office, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: August 6, 2004 

Filed: August 12, 2004 

___________

Before MELLOY, LAY, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Appellate Case: 04-2302 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/12/2004 Entry ID: 1798664 
1

The Honorable John R. Tunheim, United States District Judge for the District

of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Franklin

L. Noel, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.

2

See Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413 (1923); D.C. Court of Appeals

v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462 (1983).

-2-

Joseph D. Thornblad appeals the district court’s1

 preservice dismissal of his 42

U.S.C. § 1983 complaint as barred by Rooker-Feldman.

2

 After careful de novo

review, see Charchenko v. City of Stillwater, 47 F.3d 981, 982-83 (8th Cir. 1995), we

agree with the district court that the action was Rooker-Feldman-barred because

Thornblad’s federal complaint raised constitutional challenges already decided by the

Minnesota state courts. See Lemonds v. St. Louis County, 222 F.3d 488, 492 (8th

Cir. 2000) (except for habeas petitions, lower federal courts lack jurisdiction over

attacks on state court judgments), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1183 (2001); Charchenko,

47 F.3d at 983 (to evaluate whether Rooker-Feldman bars federal suit, federal court

must determine what state court held and whether relief requested would void state

court ruling or require determining it was wrong).

Accordingly, we affirm, see 8th Cir. R. 47A(a), except we modify the dismissal

to be without prejudice. We also deny Thornblad’s motion for appointment of

counsel and motion to retrieve the state court record.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-2302 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/12/2004 Entry ID: 1798664