Arletta Kurowski v. Brian Kurowski

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 27, 2020
Docket19-1881
StatusUnpublished

This text of Arletta Kurowski v. Brian Kurowski (Arletta Kurowski v. Brian Kurowski) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Arletta Kurowski v. Brian Kurowski, (4th Cir. 2020).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-1881

ARLETTA J. KUROWSKI, Mother retired tribal leader; DANIEL D. KUROWSKI HAWK, Full Time PH D Student; DEBRA J. KUROWSKI, Custodian Oneida Nation Casino; DONNA M. KUROWSKI-GALVAN, Caretaker of her mother Arletta Kurowski,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

v.

BRIAN KUROWSKI; NORMA J. KUROWSKI, Estate of,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge. (8:19-cv-01494-TMC)

Submitted: January 23, 2019 Decided: January 27, 2020

Before WYNN, DIAZ, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Arletta J. Kurowski, Daniel D. Kurowski Hawk, Debra J. Kurowski, Donna M. Kurowski- Galvan, Appellants Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Arletta Kurowski, Daniel Kurowski Hawk, Debra Kurowski, and Donna

Kurowski-Galvan appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the

magistrate judge and dismissing their complaint without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction,

pursuant to the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and the probate exception to federal jurisdiction.

See Dist. Of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462 (1983); Rooker v. Fid.

Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413 (1923); Graham Shopping Ctr., LLC v. Estate of Kirsch,

777 F.3d 678, 680-81 (4th Cir. 2015). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. We therefore affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Kurowski v.

Kurowski, No. 8:19-cv-01494-TMC (D.S.C. July 16, 2019). We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co.
263 U.S. 413 (Supreme Court, 1924)
District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman
460 U.S. 462 (Supreme Court, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Arletta Kurowski v. Brian Kurowski, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arletta-kurowski-v-brian-kurowski-ca4-2020.