Foretich v. The Landsburg

2 F. App'x 45
CourtCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit
DecidedMarch 8, 2001
Docket99-1716
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 2 F. App'x 45 (Foretich v. The Landsburg) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Foretich v. The Landsburg, 2 F. App'x 45 (1st Cir. 2001).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In 1992, the defendants in this action produced and broadcast a docudrama depicting the bitter child custody dispute between Dr. Eric A. Foretich and his former wife. Foretich responded to this broadcast by filing multiple suits against these defendants. In addition to the present action filed in federal district court in New Hampshire, Foretich also filed two suits, one in Virginia and one in the District of Columbia, that were removed and consolidated in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. After a series of setbacks in that forum, during which the New Hampshire action was stayed, Foretich agreed to a comprehensive settle *46 ment that resolved the remaining issues in the D.C. action and that also required him to dismiss the New Hampshire action. Shortly after reaching this agreement, however, Foretich refused to abide by it and contested its enforceability in the D.C. District Court. Both the D.C. District and Circuit Coui'ts held that the agreement was enforceable. In response, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss in New Hampshire seeking to hold Foretich to his bargain. The New Hampshire District Court granted the motion on the ground that res judicata prevented Foretich from contesting the validity of the agreement. Foretich now appeals.

Foretich agreed to dismiss the New Hampshire case as part of a broad settlement agreement to resolve overlapping litigation in the district court. The D.C. District Court and Court of Appeals later upheld the agreement so far as pertinent here despite Foretich’s attempt to back out of it. His objections to the settlement were or could have been litigated in the D.C. courts. We see no basis for allowing him to relitigate those objections here.

We deny the request for sanctions. In accordance with Fed.R.App.P. 39, however, costs are taxed against Foretich.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In Re Correa
D. Massachusetts, 2023

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 F. App'x 45, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/foretich-v-the-landsburg-ca1-2001.