Jin v. Trammell
This text of 124 F. App'x 579 (Jin v. Trammell) 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
Plaintiff Ming Ching Jin appeals the order dismissing his complaint with prejudice. We affirm.
Before filing the present suit, Jin litigated to final judgment a state court action against various defendants, including Defendants George W. Trammell, III, Edward Borunda and the County of Los Angeles. That case involved the same primary right and arose from the same factual circumstances at issue here. Having litigated and lost in state court, Jin cannot pursue a federal action against the same defendants on any legal theory resting on the same primary right. See, e.g., Mycogen Corp. v. Monsanto Co., 28 Cal.4th 888, 123 Cal.Rptr.2d 432, 51 P.3d 297, 301-04 (2002) (explaining res judicata law in California); see also Takahashi v. Bd. of Trustees of Livingston Union Sch. Dist., 783 F.2d 848, 850-51 (9th Cir.1986) (applying California res judicata law to hold that federal claims were precluded).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
124 F. App'x 579, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jin-v-trammell-ca9-2005.