Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

Green v. Mattingly, No. 08-4636

By FindLaw Staff on October 21, 2009 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

In an action claiming that defendants violated the U.S. Constitution and New York law when they successfully petitioned the family court of New York for an order temporarily removing plaintiff's child from her custody, dismissal of the action is vacated in part where: 1) the family court issued a superseding order returning plaintiff's child to her custody, and the family court proceedings were eventually dismissed, so plaintiff was not a "state-court loser" under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine; and 2) in addition, her claims did not "invite district court review and rejection" of a state court judgment.  However, the dismissal is affirmed in part where plaintiff failed to allege that the family court proceeding was terminated in her favor and thus did not state a malicious prosecution claim.

Read Green v. Mattingly, No. 08-4636

Appellate Information

Argued: October 7, 2009

Decided: October 21, 2009


Opinion by Judge Cabranes


For Appellant:

Carolyn A. Kubitschek, Lansner & Kubitschek, New York, NY

For Appellees:

Tahirih M. Sadrieh, Edward F.X. Hart and Elizabeth A. Wells, New York, NY

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard