Court Opinion

ID: 2966150
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:49:30.039931+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:02:27.454339
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

       [NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]
                 United States Court of Appeals
                     For the First Circuit

No. 99-1905

                     SHARON HUGHES MENDONCA,

                      Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                v.

                      AMY O'BRIEN WINTERSEN,

                       Defendant, Appellee.

           APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

         [Hon. Edward F. Harrington, U.S. District Judge]

                              Before

                      Selya, Circuit Judge,
                   Cyr, Senior Circuit Judge,
                   and Lipez, Circuit Judge.
                                
                                
                                
                                
                                
     Sharon Hughes Mendonca on brief pro se.
     Robin Aaronson Maher and Segalini & Neville on brief for
appellee.

December 27, 1999

                                
  
            Per Curiam.   After a thorough review of the record
  and the submissions of the parties, we affirm for the reason
  stated by the district court in its Order dated July 27, 1999. 
  Furthermore, the district court also lacked subject matter
  jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine.  See District
  of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 476
  (1983) ("[A] United States District Court has no authority to
  review final judgments of a state court in judicial
  proceedings."); Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413,
  415-16 (1923) (same).
            Affirmed.  1st Cir. Loc. R. 27(c).