From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Carter v. Clark

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit
Dec 15, 2015
622 F. App'x 607 (8th Cir. 2015)

Opinion

No. 15-2053

12-15-2015

Leon Henry Carter, III Plaintiff - Appellant v. Ralph Clark; Plastech Industries; Plastech Corporation Defendants - Appellees


Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis [Unpublished] Before GRUENDER, BENTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM.

Leon Carter appeals the district court's dismissal of his action as barred by collateral estoppel and res judicata. Upon careful review, we conclude that the dismissal was proper. See Nolles v. State Comm. for Reorg. of Sch. Dists., 524 F.3d 892, 901 (8th Cir. 2008) (res judicata effect of first forum's judgment is governed by first forum's law; de novo standard of review); see also Hauschildt v. Beckingham, 686 N.W.2d 829, 840 (Minn. 2004) (standard for applying res judicata; doctrine applies not only to every matter which was actually litigated, but also to every matter which might have been litigated).

The Honorable Michael J. Davis, then-Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendation of the Honorable Leo I. Brisbois, United States Magistrate Judge of the District of Minnesota. --------

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.


Summaries of

Carter v. Clark

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit
Dec 15, 2015
622 F. App'x 607 (8th Cir. 2015)
Case details for

Carter v. Clark

Case Details

Full title:Leon Henry Carter, III Plaintiff - Appellant v. Ralph Clark; Plastech…

Court:United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

Date published: Dec 15, 2015

Citations

622 F. App'x 607 (8th Cir. 2015)

Citing Cases

Richmond v. Wiese

Applying this rule, district courts within the Eighth Circuit have routinely considered prior state court…

Noyes v. Fed. Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n

Applying this rule, district courts within the Eighth Circuit have routinely considered prior state court…