Justia Federal District Court Opinions

Reza Foroohar appeals the district court's sua sponte dismissal of his complaint. We affirm.

Foroohar's appellate brief, like his complaint in the district court, is a morass of claims that all of the judges involved in hearing his lengthy divorce-related proceedings in the Circuit Court of Cook County, as well as his ex-wife's lawyers, the Appellate Court of Illinois, the Supreme Court of the State of Illinois, the Judicial Inquiry Board and the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission, were biased against him and conspired to deprive him of a fair hearing. The defendants assert that federal review of these claims is barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413, 416 (1923); District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 476 (1983). The doctrine recognizes that federal district and appellate courts have no subject matter jurisdiction to review the civil judgments of state courts.

The Rooker-Feldman doctrine applies here and prevents our consideration of Foroohar's claims. Although Foroohar's complaint alleges due process claims, those claims are inextricably intertwined with the state court orders related to his divorce proceedings. Foroohar's claims of bias and procedural unfairness stem from his belief that the judges must have been biased because they issued orders to which he objects. Such claims must be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. See Wright v. Tackett, 39 F.3d 155 (7th Cir.1994). The judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.