Opinion ID: 204001
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Whether the state-court judgment in the

Text: foreclosure proceeding “was rendered before” the Silvas commenced their second federal action In determining whether the state-court judgment was “rendered before the [federal] district court proceeding commenced,” Exxon Mobil, 544 U.S. at 284, Exxon Mobil directs that “a state court judgment is sufficiently final for operation of the Rooker-Feldman doctrine[] when ‘the state proceedings [have] ended,’” Federacion de Maestros, - 11 - 410 F.3d at 24 (quoting Exxon Mobil, 544 U.S. at 291). The First Circuit has further concluded that, for Rooker-Feldman purposes, “when the highest state court in which review is available has affirmed the judgment below and nothing is left to be resolved, then without a doubt the state court proceedings have ‘ended.’” 7 Id., at 24. In this case, the state foreclosure proceeding had certainly “ended” by the time the state’s highest court, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, denied the Silvas further review on January 31, 2008. See Pellegrini, 880 N.E.2d at 413 (Table). The Silvas initiated their second federal action two months later, on March 25, 2008. Thus, the state-court proceedings had ended, for Rooker-Feldman purposes, before the Silvas commenced their second federal action.