Hall v. Miller
This text of 287 F. App'x 604 (Hall v. Miller) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
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]*605have 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.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
287 F. App'x 604, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hall-v-miller-ca9-2008.