Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-19-01881/USCOURTS-ca4-19-01881-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Arletta J. Kurowski
Appellant
Brian Kurowski
Appellee
Debra J. Kurowski
Appellant
Norma J. Kurowski
Appellee
Daniel D. Kurowski Hawk
Appellant
Donna M. Kurowski-Galvan
Appellant

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-1881

ARLETTA J. KUROWSKI, Mother retired tribal leader; DANIEL D. KUROWSKI 

HAWK, Full Time PH D Student; DEBRA J. KUROWSKI, Custodian Oneida 

Nation Casino; DONNA M. KUROWSKI-GALVAN, Caretaker of her mother 

Arletta Kurowski,

 Plaintiffs - Appellants,

v.

BRIAN KUROWSKI; NORMA J. KUROWSKI, Estate of,

 Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at 

Anderson. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge. (8:19-cv-01494-TMC)

Submitted: January 23, 2019 Decided: January 27, 2020

Before WYNN, DIAZ, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Arletta J. Kurowski, Daniel D. Kurowski Hawk, Debra J. Kurowski, Donna M. KurowskiGalvan, Appellants Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 19-1881 Doc: 13 Filed: 01/27/2020 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Arletta Kurowski, Daniel Kurowski Hawk, Debra Kurowski, and Donna 

Kurowski-Galvan appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the 

magistrate judge and dismissing their complaint without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction, 

pursuant to the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and the probate exception to federal jurisdiction. 

See Dist. Of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462 (1983); Rooker v. Fid. 

Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413 (1923); Graham Shopping Ctr., LLC v. Estate of Kirsch, 

777 F.3d 678, 680-81 (4th Cir. 2015). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible 

error. We therefore affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Kurowski v. 

Kurowski, No. 8:19-cv-01494-TMC (D.S.C. July 16, 2019). We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 19-1881 Doc: 13 Filed: 01/27/2020 Pg: 2 of 2