Connection lost
Server error
Reisner v. Stoller Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
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: A plaintiff sued numerous defendants, including judges, over an alleged fraudulent property transfer. The court dismissed most claims based on procedural bars like res judicata, the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, and judicial immunity, but allowed certain state law claims that accrued after the prior litigation to proceed.
Legal Significance: The case illustrates the powerful preclusive effect of prior state court judgments under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and res judicata, and the broad scope of absolute judicial immunity, which bars suits for damages against judges acting in their judicial capacity.
Reisner v. Stoller Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Plaintiff Ida Reisner provided a $10,000 down payment for a home in 1977, believing she would be a co-owner with defendant Michael Augello, with whom she had an intimate relationship. However, the deed was recorded solely in Augello’s name. For nearly two decades, Reisner and her sons lived in the home, and she made all mortgage payments in cash to Augello. After discovering in 1992 that she was not on the deed, a series of legal disputes began. In 1996, Augello commenced a summary eviction proceeding in state court. Reisner responded by filing an action in New York Supreme Court to reform the deed, alleging fraud. In a 1997 order, Justice Sherwood dismissed Reisner’s action, finding it was barred by the statute of limitations for fraud. Following this dismissal, the state justice court proceeded with the eviction, and in 1998, it issued a judgment of possession and a warrant of eviction in favor of Augello. Reisner then filed the instant federal action against Augello, his attorney, the bank that issued the mortgage, and all state and federal judges who had presided over her various legal proceedings, alleging a wide-ranging conspiracy and RICO violations to deprive her of her home.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Do the doctrines of res judicata, collateral estoppel, Rooker-Feldman, and judicial immunity bar a federal lawsuit that seeks to relitigate claims and issues previously decided, or that could have been decided, in prior state court proceedings?
Yes. The court held that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and principles of claim 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 adipiscin
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Do the doctrines of res judicata, collateral estoppel, Rooker-Feldman, and judicial immunity bar a federal lawsuit that seeks to relitigate claims and issues previously decided, or that could have been decided, in prior state court proceedings?
Conclusion
This case serves as a powerful illustration 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 com
Legal Rule
A federal district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine 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
Legal Analysis
The court's analysis centered on several key procedural and jurisdictional doctrines that 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 e
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- Claims against judges, clerks, and bankruptcy trustees were dismissed based on