REISNER v. STOLLER Case Brief
Complete case briefs with LSD+
Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: After losing state court actions over title and possession of her home, a plaintiff sued numerous parties in federal court. The court dismissed most claims, finding them barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and res judicata, which prevent federal relitigation of state court judgments.
Legal Significance: The case illustrates the powerful preclusive effect of state court judgments under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and res judicata, preventing lower federal courts from acting as appellate reviewers of state court decisions, even when federal claims like RICO are raised.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Plaintiff Ida Reisner and defendant Michael Augello were in an intimate relationship. In 1977, Reisner provided the down payment for a home, but the deed was recorded solely in Augello’s name. For nearly two decades, Reisner resided in the home and made all mortgage payments in cash to Augello, believing she was the owner. After discovering in 1992 that her name was not on the deed, she faced eviction proceedings initiated by Augello in 1996. Reisner filed an action in New York Supreme Court to reform the deed, but the court dismissed her claim as barred by the statute of limitations for fraud. Following this dismissal, the local Justice Court entered a final judgment of eviction against Reisner. After further unsuccessful legal challenges, including a bankruptcy filing, Reisner filed the instant action in federal district court. She sued Augello, his attorney, the bank, and various state and federal judges, alleging a wide-ranging conspiracy and asserting claims under RICO and § 1983 to challenge the loss of her home.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Can a plaintiff use a federal civil rights and RICO action to collaterally attack final state court judgments regarding property title and possession that were previously litigated and decided against her?
No. The court held that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and the principles of Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia dese
IRAC Legal Analysis
About IRAC analysis
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.
Legal Issue
Can a plaintiff use a federal civil rights and RICO action to collaterally attack final state court judgments regarding property title and possession that were previously litigated and decided against her?
Conclusion
This case serves as a clear application of the finality of state Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo
Legal Rule
The Rooker-Feldman doctrine divests lower federal courts of subject matter jurisdiction over Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore
Legal Analysis
The court's analysis centered on jurisdictional and preclusionary doctrines that barred review Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- Pro se plaintiffs sued numerous defendants, including judges, over alleged home