Monell v. The Beverly Hospital
This text of 25 F. App'x 11 (Monell v. The Beverly Hospital) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
We affirm the district court on the basis of its decision on the merits of the plaintiff-appellants’ claims. We have considered sua sponte whether the Rooker-Feldman doctrine or Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env’t, 523 U.S. 83, 101, 118 S.Ct. 1003, 140 L.Ed.2d 210 (1998), precluded the district court from reaching the merits, and concluded that they did not.
We deny the appellees’ motion for sanctions in the form of damages and costs on appeal. There is no evidence or even a suggestion that the appeal was prompted by malice or bad faith. And while we do not consider the merits close, neither are we prepared to say that the appeal was wholly frivolous. The usual appeal costs shall be awarded to appellees.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
25 F. App'x 11, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/monell-v-the-beverly-hospital-ca1-2002.