Ragonese et al v. Peterka et al
| Robert-Joseph Ragonese and Jennifer-Lynn Robertson |
| Edward Ralph Peterka, Joel Louis Chupack, Lloyd James Brooks, Sophia Harriet Hall, Iris Yolanda Martinez and Michael Joseph DeVito |
| 1:2023cv03669 |
| June 9, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Thomas M Durkin |
| Contract: Negotiable Instrument |
| 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 25, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 16 ENTERED JUDGMENT on 7/25/2023. Mailed notice. (ecw, ) |
| Filing 15 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin: In this action, Plaintiffs challenge the foreclosure on a home that they allegedly inherited. They bring the suit against the judges in the state foreclosure action, the attorney for the foreclosure plaintiff, other court officials, and the CEO of the foreclosure plaintiff. Defendant Edward Ralph Peterka has filed a motion to dismiss, arguing in part that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. R. 7; R. 8. Even so, the Court must police its subject matter jurisdiction sua sponte. See Wernsing v. Thompson, 423 F.3d 732, 743 (7th Cir. 2005). Under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, a federal district court is precluded from exercising jurisdiction "'over cases brought by state court losers challenging state court judgments rendered before the district court proceedings commenced.'" Bauer v. Koester, 951 F.3d 863, 866 (7th Cir. 2020) (quoting Sykes v. Cook Cty. Circuit Court Prob. Div., 837 F.3d 736, 741 (7th Cir. 2016)) (affirming dismissal of case alleging fraud in state court foreclosure proceedings based on the Rooker-Feldman doctrine). Here, the state court entered a foreclosure judgment on March 10, 2023. R. 13-2; see also Spiegel v. Kim, 952 F.3d 844, 847 (7th Cir. 2020) (A court may take judicial notice of public records such as state court orders). Plaintiffs' claims are inextricably intertwined with the state foreclosure action and would require the court to review state court findings. The relief sought by the complaintthat is, an injunction to stop the sale of the propertymakes clear that the purpose of this suit is to directly challenge and overturn the state court's foreclosure judgment. Indeed, in addition to the complaint, Plaintiffs filed a "counterclaim," which they describe as a "collateral attack for misconduct/acts and omissions, contract fraud and civil conspiracy related to the attempted foreclosure and sale" in the state foreclosure action and through which they seek $250 million in damages. R. 3 at 16. Therefore, the Court dismisses this case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Defendant's motion to dismiss #7 is denied as moot. Mailed notice. (ecw, ) |
| Filing 14 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin: Defendant Edward R. Peterka's motion for leave to file exhibits to memorandum in support of motion to dismiss #13 is granted. Mailed notice. (ecw, ) |
| Filing 13 MOTION by Defendant Edward Ralph Peterka for leave to file exhibits to memorandum in support of motion to dismiss (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1. Foreclosure Complaint, #2 Exhibit 2. Foreclosure Judgment, #3 Exhibit 3. Certificate of Sale)(Richardson, Matthew) |
| Filing 12 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin: Motion for extension of time to answer #11 is granted. Defendant Michael Joseph DeVito is to answer orotherwise plead by 8/31/2023. Mailed notice. (ecw, ) |
| Filing 11 MOTION by Defendant Michael Joseph DeVito for extension of time to file answer regarding complaint #1 (Talcott, Brian) |
| Filing 10 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Michael Joseph DeVito by Brian James Talcott (Talcott, Brian) |
| Filing 9 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Michael Joseph DeVito by Krysta Kaye Gumbiner (Gumbiner, Krysta) |
| Filing 8 MEMORANDUM by Edward Ralph Peterka in support of motion to dismiss/lack of jurisdiction #7 (Richardson, Matthew) |
| Filing 7 MOTION by Defendant Edward Ralph Peterka to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim upon which can be granted (Richardson, Matthew) |
| Filing 6 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Edward Ralph Peterka by Matthew John Richardson (Richardson, Matthew) |
| SUMMONS Issued as to Defendants Lloyd James Brooks, Joel Louis Chupack, Michael Joseph DeVito, Sophia Harriet Hall, Iris Yolanda Martinez, Edward Ralph Peterka (jg, ) |
| Filing 5 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin: By 8/22/2023, the parties are to file a joint status report. The parties may refer to the format detailed on the Court's website under New and Reassigned cases. Mailed notice. (ecw, ) |
| CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached #Consent To# form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. (rc, ) |
| Filing 3 COUNTER Claim Contract Fraud and Civil Conspiracy Demand for an Article III Court of Equity Jury Trial Demand for Joinder with Case Number 2022 CH 12004 Counterclaim and Jury Demand on all counts Applicable, by Robert-Joseph Ragonese, Jennifer-Lynn Robertson. (Exhibits) (rc, ) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet. (rc, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Jennifer-Lynn Robertson, Robert-Joseph Ragonese. (Exhibit) (rc, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable M. David Weisman. Case assignment: Random assignment. (rc, ) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Illinois Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
