Sutter & Gillham PLLC v. Judy Henry

United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · July 31, 2025 · No. 24-1071

Summary

This Eighth Circuit opinion addresses whether federal claims alleging a conspiracy related to state-court proceedings are barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. The court concludes that the doctrine does not apply because the plaintiffs seek damages for the defendants' independent wrongful acts rather than asking the federal court to overturn a state-court judgment. Accordingly, the appellate court vacates the district court's dismissal and remands the case for further proceedings.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Writing for the Court
GRASZ; STRAS; KOBES
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Decision date
July 31, 2025
Docket number
24-1071
Procedural posture
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Central after that court dismissed the case under the Rooker‑Feldman doctrine.
Standard of review
de novo
Precedential value
Published
Parties
Sutter & Gillham PLLC, Luther Oneal Sutter, Lucien R. Gillham v. Judy Simmons Henry, Jacob Post Fair, Scott A. Irby, Wright Lindsey Jennings LLP, Tommy Williams, Bryan Adams, Eric Bell, Brandon Adams, Skylar Adams, Efrem Neely, Christopher Wesley Burks, Brandon M. Haubert, WH Law PLC, John Does 1-100
Disposition
remanded

Topics

subject matter jurisdictionappellate jurisdictionstandard of reviewcivil procedure

Practice areas

civil procedureconstitutional law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Rooker‑Feldman doctrine applies to the plaintiffs' federal claims alleging a conspiratorial scheme involving state‑court judges and parties.

Holdings

  1. Claims arising out of an alleged state‑court conspiracy can escape dismissal under the Rooker‑Feldman doctrine.

Key quotations

The answer is yes, so we vacate the district court’s order to the contrary and remand for further proceedings.

Factual background

The plaintiffs, a law firm and its partners, withdrew from a state‑court wrongful‑death case after the state court found misconduct and dismissed the case with prejudice. The firm alleges that state‑court judges and opposing parties conspired to obtain sanctions against the firm. The federal suit seeks damages and declaratory relief based on alleged First Amendment and due‑process violations.

Procedural history

The district court dismissed the plaintiffs' federal claims alleging a conspiratorial scheme by state‑court judges and parties, holding that the Rooker‑Feldman doctrine barred the action. The plaintiffs appealed, arguing that the doctrine does not apply because they are not state‑court losers and their claims do not seek to overturn a state‑court judgment.

Remand instructions

Vacate the district court’s dismissal order and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…