
USCA1 Opinion

	




          September 15, 1995                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                                          ____________________        No. 95-1572                                   CONSTANCE CAMPISI,                                Plaintiff, Appellant,                                          v.                           ANGELA C. MAFFEO, ETC., ET AL.,                                Defendants, Appellees.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS                     [Hon. William G. Young, U.S. District Judge]                                             ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                Cyr, Boudin and Lynch,                                   Circuit Judges.                                   ______________                                 ____________________            Constance Campisi on brief pro se.            _________________            Antonette S.  Fernandez, William H.  Carroll and  Dillon & Carroll            _______________________  ___________________      ________________        on brief for appellee Angela C. Maffeo, Trustee.            Timothy E. Sterritt on brief for appellee Alphonse A. Scott.            ___________________                                 ____________________                                 ____________________                      Per Curiam.  The district court correctly dismissed                      __________            plaintiff's  action for lack of federal jurisdiction.  To the            extent  plaintiff wanted  the  district court  to review  the            correctness  of the state court decisions, plaintiff's action            was  properly  dismissed  because lower  federal  courts lack            jurisdiction  to review  state  court judgments.   Rooker  v.                                                               ______            Fidelity Trust  Co.,  263  U.S. 413  (1923).  To  the  extent            ___________________            plaintiff wanted the district court to hear and determine the            merits  of  her  controversies  with  defendants   and  their            predecessors  in title,  the  action was  properly  dismissed            because  plaintiff's disputes, as described in her complaint,            amended  complaint, and  other papers,  are not  the type  of            matters over which federal courts have jurisdiction.                               _______                      Affirmed.                      ________                                         -3-
