From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Isaacson v. Shawn Berrigan

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 13, 2011
453 F. App'x 731 (9th Cir. 2011)

Opinion

No. 10-15956 D.C. No. 2:09-cv-00017-MCE-DAD

10-13-2011

EUGENE E. ISAACSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SHAWN BERRIGAN; et al., Defendants - Appellees.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION


MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Morrison C. England, District Judge, Presiding

Before: SILVERMAN, W. FLETCHER, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

Eugene E. Isaacson appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his action alleging a conspiracy by defendants to have his vessel, the Gray Finn, seized and impounded. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, and may affirm on any basis supported by the record. Corrie v. Caterpillar, Inc., 503 F.3d 974, 979 (9th Cir. 2007). We affirm.

Dismissal of the action was proper because the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel bar Isaacson's claims given that he had previously litigated claims arising out of the seizure and impounding of his vessel in California state court. See Manufactured Home Cmtys., Inc. v. City of San Jose, 420 F.3d 1022, 1031 (9th Cir. 2005) (describing res judicata under California law); Hydranautics v. FilmTec Corp., 204 F.3d 880, 885 (9th Cir. 2000) (describing collateral estoppel under California law).

Isaacson's remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Isaacson v. Shawn Berrigan

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 13, 2011
453 F. App'x 731 (9th Cir. 2011)
Case details for

Isaacson v. Shawn Berrigan

Case Details

Full title:EUGENE E. ISAACSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SHAWN BERRIGAN; et al.…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Oct 13, 2011

Citations

453 F. App'x 731 (9th Cir. 2011)