Summary
holding that Rooker-Feldman precluded action from proceeding where "Plaintiff challenge[d] the constitutionality of his divorce decree [but did] not attack the constitutionality of Maryland's divorce statutes"
Summary of this case from Pinto v. PintoOpinion
Civil Action No. 3:01-CV-2006-M
July 11, 2002
ORDER ACCEPTING CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The Court has under consideration the Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge Paul D. Stickney on the issue of whether the Court has subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff filed objections, and the District Court has made a de novo review of the Findings and Conclusions and has independently determined that it does not have subject matter jurisdiction. The Court does not reach the statute of limitations issues discussed by the United States Magistrate Judge in the Conclusions and Recommendation. The objections are overruled, and the Court accepts the Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, except that the Court does not reach the limitations issues.
This case is dismissed with prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to FED. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(l). This determination renders moot "Plaintiff's Request for Entry of Default and Default Judgment," filed March 11, 2002.