UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-1650
BISMARK KWAKU TORKORNOO,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
NINA HELWIG, Esq.; JOHN MONAHAN, Esq.; MARY TORKORNOO;
JACQUELINE NGOLE, Esq.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Theodore D. Chuang, District Judge.
(8:15-cv-02652-TDC)
Submitted: October 31, 2016 Decided: December 8, 2016
Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Bismark Kwaku Torkornoo, Appellant Pro Se. Nina Helwig, John
Monahan, Jacqueline Ngole, Appellees Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Bismark Kwaku Torkornoo appeals the district court’s order
dismissing his civil action on the basis of the Rooker-Feldman ∗
doctrine after finding that Torkornoo’s claims arose out of or
were inextricably intertwined with prior state court proceedings.
Subsequent to the district court’s order, we clarified the narrow
scope of the Rooker-Feldman doctrine in Thana v. Bd. Of License
Commissioners for Charles City, 827 F.3d 314 (4th Cir. 2016),
explaining that the doctrine does not apply “if a plaintiff in
federal court does not seek review of the state court judgment
itself but instead presents an independent claim” that is related
to a matter decided by a state court. Id. at 320 (internal
quotation marks and emphasis omitted). Instead, “any tensions
between the two proceedings should be managed through the doctrines
of preclusion, comity, and abstention.” Id.
Because the district court’s Rooker-Feldman analysis may be
inconsistent with our recent clarification, we vacate its order
and remand for reconsideration in light of Thana. We deny as moot
Appellee Monahan’s motion to dismiss. We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
∗ Rooker v. Fid. Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413 (1923); D.C. Ct. of
App. v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462 (1983).
2
presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
VACATED AND REMANDED
3