Summary
The United States District Court for the District of Maryland dismissed without prejudice a pro se civil rights complaint challenging child-support-related suspension of the plaintiff’s driver’s license and passport. The court held that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine deprived it of subject-matter jurisdiction because the claims sought review and rejection of state-court judgments. The court granted the plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis and closed the case without reaching the motions for temporary or preliminary relief.
Court
United States District Court for the District of Maryland
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the District of Maryland
Decision date
February 18, 2026
Docket number
Civ. No. DLB-26-599
Disposition
dismissed
Questions Presented
- Whether the federal district court had subject-matter jurisdiction over a civil-rights action challenging state-court child-support judgments and related license and passport suspensions.
- Whether the Rooker-Feldman doctrine barred the federal claims because Conoco was seeking review and rejection of state-court judgments.
- Whether the court should reach Conoco's motions for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction after determining that subject-matter jurisdiction was lacking.
Holdings
- The district court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction because Conoco's claims challenged state-court judgments and sought federal review and rejection of those judgments.
- The court did not reach the motions for a temporary restraining order or preliminary relief because it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over the action.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…