Cooks v. City of Los Angeles Police Department
- Charles Breyer
- 3:20-cv-04352
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In re Charles R. Cooks: Judge Breyer dismissed the federal case for lack of jurisdiction and granted permission to proceed without fees.
Charles R. Cooks, whose federal action was dismissed, and the state-court defendants involved in the two earlier actions.
What happened
In re Charles R. Cooks involved a state prisoner’s attempt to appeal or cancel the dismissals of two civil-rights cases in California state superior courts. One case involved Los Angeles Police Department employees, and the other involved Los Angeles County Superior Court employees.
The court dismissed the federal action because federal district courts cannot review state-court decisions. The court also granted Cooks permission to proceed without paying filing fees based on his affidavit of poverty.
Judge Charles R. Breyer directed the clerk to terminate the other pending motions as moot and close the case. The opinion does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
The detailed version
- Cooks v. City of Los Angeles Police Department · No. 3:20-cv-04352
- Charles Breyer
- Sept. 3, 2020
Background
Charles R. Cooks, a state prisoner incarcerated at California State Prison, Solano, filed this action without a lawyer. He sought to appeal or vacate the dismissals of two civil-rights actions he had filed in California state superior courts. The Amador County Superior Court dismissed one action on December 7, 2018; that case involved various Los Angeles Police Department employees. The Merced County Superior Court dismissed the other action on March 3, 2018; that case involved various Los Angeles County Superior Court employees.
Reason for dismissal
The court held that federal district courts lack subject-matter jurisdiction—the power to hear a case—to review state-court decisions. It applied the rule commonly called the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, which prevents a federal district court from acting as an appeals court over a state-court judgment. The court explained that this rule applied even though the state-court decisions were not made by the highest state court and even though federal constitutional issues were involved.
Other rulings and disposition
The court dismissed Cooks’s action. Based solely on his affidavit of poverty, it granted his motion to proceed without paying filing fees. The clerk was instructed to terminate all other pending motions as moot and close the case. The opinion does not specify whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.