GARY CORDERY V. HAWAII SUPREME COURT, ET AL, No. 22-16970 (9th Cir. 2023)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED AUG 21 2023 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT GARY A. CORDERY, No. Plaintiff-Appellant, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 22-16970 D.C. No. 1:22-cv-00439-HG-KJM v. MEMORANDUM* HAWAII SUPREME COURT; MARK E. RECKTENWALD; HOLLY T. SHIKADA, Esquire, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Attorney General for the State of Hawaii, Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii Helen W. Gillmor, District Judge, Presiding Submitted August 15, 2023** Before: TASHIMA, S.R. THOMAS, and FORREST, Circuit Judges. Gary A. Cordery appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations arising out of his state court case. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). review de novo. Seismic Reservoir 2020, Inc. v. Paulsson, 785 F.3d 330, 333 (9th Cir. 2015) (dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6)); Noel v. Hall, 341 F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir. 2003) (dismissal under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine). We affirm. The district court properly concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine because Cordery’s action is a “forbidden de facto appeal” of a state court judgment and raises claims that are “inextricably intertwined” with that judgment. See Noel, 341 F.3d at 1158, 1163 (discussing the Rooker-Feldman doctrine); see also Cooper v. Ramos, 704 F.3d 772, 779 (9th Cir. 2012) (explaining that claims are “inextricably intertwined” where “the relief requested in the federal action would effectively reverse the state court decision or void its ruling” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)). AFFIRMED. 2 22-16970

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.