Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-09-02966/USCOURTS-ca8-09-02966-0/pdf.json

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

---

1

The Honorable James E. Gritzner, United States District Judge for the Southern

District of Iowa.

2

See Rooker v. Fid. Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413 (1923); Dist. of Columbia Ct. of

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

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 09-2966

___________

Andre Quinn Bell, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Southern District of Iowa.

Constance L. Price, in her individual *

capacity only; Dr. John Campbell, in * [UNPUBLISHED]

his individual capacity only; Phil T. *

McCollum, in his individual capacity *

only, *

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: April 26, 2010

Filed: May 12, 2010

___________

Before LOKEN, BYE, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Andre Bell appeals the district court’s1

 order dismissing, as barred under the

Rooker-Feldman2

 doctrine, his complaint against personnel of the Iowa Board of

Appellate Case: 09-2966 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/12/2010 Entry ID: 3663706
-2-

Dental Examiners (“the Board”). In his complaint, Bell asserted, inter alia, violations

of his constitutional rights (including his rights to due process and equal protection),

a civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act violation, and Fair Debt

Collection Practices Act violations, arising from the Board’s investigation and

discipline of Bell.

Following careful de novo review of the record, we find no basis for reversal.

See Skit Int’l, Ltd. v. DAC Techs. of Ark., Inc., 487 F.3d 1154, 1156 (8th Cir. 2007)

(de novo review of district court’s dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction;

“Rooker-Feldman doctrine prohibits lower federal courts from exercising appellate

review of state court judgments”); see also Dist. of Columbia Ct. of Appeals v.

Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 477 (“A judicial inquiry investigates, declares and enforces

liabilities as they stand on present or past facts and under laws supposed already to

exist. . . . [T]he nature of a proceeding depends not upon the character of the body but

upon the character of the proceedings.” (quotations omitted)). Accordingly, the

judgment of the district court is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

____________________________

Appellate Case: 09-2966 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/12/2010 Entry ID: 3663706