Opinion ID: 202724
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Exhaustion of the Joint Venture Claim

Text: 28 Clements has not sought to persuade us that his ALOFAR described, or even hinted at, a federal basis for his joint venture claim. The ALOFAR's discussion of this claim refers only to state law, and none of the cited state cases relied on federal law. The federal basis for the claim was not presented fairly and recognizably, Casella, 207 F.3d at 20, nor did Clements articulate a federal law argument in such a way as to make it probable that a reasonable jurist would have been alerted to the existence of the federal question, Scarpa, 38 F.3d at 6. Without any references, explicit or implicit, to federal law or principles, the ALOFAR's presentation of the joint venture claim did not apprise the SJC of a possible federal error in the state court's decision. Therefore, we agree with the district court's conclusion that the joint venture claim was not exhausted.