Diviacchi v. State Bar of California

Background

Valeriano Diviacchi represented himself. He passed the California bar exam in 2022, but the State Bar of California told him that he could not submit the required Application for Determination of Moral Character because he had been suspended for disciplinary reasons from the Massachusetts and Maine bars. The State Bar notified him of his right to seek review by the California Supreme Court.

Diviacchi petitioned the California Supreme Court for review and later sought rehearing. He argued that the State Bar’s application of its rule violated his due-process and equal-protection rights and the Privileges and Immunities Clause. The California Supreme Court denied both requests.

Claims and requested relief

Diviacchi then sued the State Bar under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He claimed violations of the Privileges and Immunities Clause, substantive due process, procedural due process, equal protection, and the First Amendment right to petition the government. He sued only the State Bar and sought equitable relief—an order allowing him to submit the moral-character application—rather than money damages.

Court’s analysis

The court granted the State Bar’s motion to dismiss on two grounds.

First, the court held that the Eleventh Amendment barred the lawsuit against the State Bar. That amendment generally protects a state and its agencies from lawsuits in federal court unless the state consents or Congress validly removes that protection. The court relied on Ninth Circuit authority treating the State Bar as an arm of the state. It also noted that Diviacchi had not named individual state officials, against whom certain claims for prospective relief might otherwise be available.

Second, the court held that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine barred the claims. That doctrine prevents lower federal courts from acting as appeals courts for final state-court judgments. The court reasoned that Diviacchi had challenged the State Bar’s decision in the proper forum—the California Supreme Court—and was seeking the same relief in federal court after that court denied his petitions. The federal lawsuit therefore amounted to an appeal of the California Supreme Court’s final decision.

Disposition

The court dismissed the claim against the State Bar with prejudice under the Eleventh Amendment. In its conclusion, the court dismissed the complaint with prejudice, finding that Diviacchi could not cure the problem because he sought only an order allowing him to submit the moral-character application. The order resolved the State Bar’s motion to dismiss, identified as ECF No. 7.