Myers v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
685 F. App'x 679
10th Cir.2017Background
- Donny and Brenda Myers (pro se) defaulted on their mortgage; Wells Fargo foreclosed and obtained a 2007 Oklahoma state-court judgment of foreclosure.
- Myers repeatedly sought to vacate the state judgment in Oklahoma state court alleging wrongful foreclosure, lack of standing, and fraud; those motions were denied.
- In 2016 the Myers filed a federal complaint invoking Rule 60, asserting claims including lack of standing, fraud on the court, void assignment, due-process violations, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and slander of title.
- Wells Fargo moved to dismiss on Rooker–Feldman grounds, claim and issue preclusion, and failure to state a claim; the district court dismissed under Rooker–Feldman and alternatively res judicata/collateral estoppel.
- The Myers appealed pro se; the Tenth Circuit found their appellate brief inadequate (no record/legal citations and improper incorporation of district-court filings) and addressed the merits, affirming dismissal under Rooker–Feldman.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether federal court may review/state-judgment-related claims (Rooker–Feldman) | Myers contends federal court can hear claims attacking the foreclosure judgment | Wells Fargo argues Rooker–Feldman bars federal review of state-court judgment or claims intertwined with it | Rooker–Feldman applies; district court lacked jurisdiction to review these claims; affirmed |
| Whether an "extrinsic fraud" allegation avoids Rooker–Feldman | Myers claims extrinsic fraud on the state court removes Rooker–Feldman bar | Wells Fargo contends no extrinsic-fraud exception to Rooker–Feldman in Tenth Circuit | Rejected: no recognized extrinsic-fraud exception; fraud claims belong in state-court appeals |
| Whether lack of reasonable opportunity to raise federal claims in state court defeats Rooker–Feldman | Myers asserts he had no reasonable chance to raise federal claims in state proceedings, so federal suit should proceed | Wells Fargo asserts Rooker–Feldman applies regardless of whether state process afforded full opportunity | Rejected: Rooker–Feldman applies even if state proceedings did not actually hear every issue |
| Whether pro se appellate briefing deficiencies or improper incorporation affect review | Myers tried to incorporate district-court filings and provided no citations/authority | Wells Fargo relied on procedural deficiencies and merits defenses | Court found brief inadequate, disallowed incorporation by reference, and declined to excuse noncompliance; nevertheless addressed and rejected merits under precedent |
Key Cases Cited
- Merrill Lynch Bus. Fin. Servs., Inc. v. Nudell, 363 F.3d 1072 (10th Cir.) (describing Rooker–Feldman as limiting federal review of state-court decisions)
- Mo’s Express, LLC v. Sopkin, 441 F.3d 1229 (10th Cir.) (Rooker–Feldman bars claims actually decided by or inextricably intertwined with state judgment)
- Tal v. Hogan, 453 F.3d 1244 (10th Cir.) (no extrinsic-fraud exception to Rooker–Feldman; fraud allegations should be pursued in state courts)
- Kenmen Eng’g v. City of Union, 314 F.3d 468 (10th Cir.) (Rooker–Feldman applies regardless of whether state proceedings afforded a full and fair opportunity to litigate federal claims)
- Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Indus. Corp., 544 U.S. 280 (U.S.) (limiting language on abstention and preclusion cited in discussion of Rooker–Feldman scope)