Hall v. Miller
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
A review of the record and the opening brief indicates that the questions raised in this appeal are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam) (stating standard).
Appellants’ complaint for damages in this case is essentially identical to the earlier complaint filed in case No. 4:06-CV-00525-GLF. Because appellants’ claims [605] have been adjudicated and a final judgment on the merits has been previously reached, appellants’ claims are barred by res judicata. See, e.g., Federated Dep’t Stores, Inc. v. Moitie, 452 U.S. 394, 398, 101 S.Ct. 2424, 69 L.Ed.2d 103 (1981); In re Jenson, 980 F.2d 1254, 1256 (9th Cir. 1992).
Accordingly, appellees’ joint motion for summary affirmance of the district court’s judgment is granted.
All pending motions are denied as moot.
AFFIRMED.
Footnotes
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
287 F. App'x 604 (Hall v. Miller) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.