From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thomas v. Ardyss Intern., Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Jul 11, 2011
432 F. App'x 361 (5th Cir. 2011)

Opinion

No. 10-20274 Summary Calendar.

July 11, 2011.

Elizabeth Thomas, Tomball, TX, pro se.

Melvin L. Smith, Jr., Esq., Jamie Russell Bures, Mel Smith Associates, P.C., Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, USDC No. 4:09-CV-1366.

Before KING, JOLLY, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.


Elizabeth Thomas appeals the dismissal of this federal civil suit on grounds that a Texas court judgment is a res judicata bar. Thomas has failed to establish that the district court erred in dismissing her suit. See Black v. North Panola Sch. Disi, 461 F.3d 584, 588 (5th Cir. 2006); Travelers Ins. Co. v. Joachim, 315 S.W.3d 860, 862-66 (Tex. 2010). Her collateral attacks on the state court judgment-which confirmed an arbitration award-and on that arbitration agreement and on the arbitration award as well, are barred by res judicata. See Oreck Direct, LLC v. Dyson, Inc., 560 F.3d 398, 401 (5th Cir. 2009) (citing In re Williams, 298 F.3d 458, 461-62 (5th Cir. 2002)). The dismissal of Thomas's suit on res judicata grounds renders moot her challenge to the district court's order compelling arbitration. See Dailey v. Vought Aircraft Co., 141 F.3d 224, 227 (5th Cir. 1998); Bailey v. Southerland, 821 F.2d 277, 278 (5th Cir. 1987).

Thomas's contention that the district court abused its discretion in granting a stay based on the Colorado River abstention has no merit. Cf. Am. Guarantee Liab. Ins. Co. v. Anco Insulations, Inc., 408 F.3d 248, 250-51 (5th Cir. 2005).

The motion for sanctions is denied. Cf. FED. R.APP. P. 46(c); In re Snyder, 472 U.S. 634, 645, 105 S.Ct. 2874, 86 L.Ed.2d 504 (1985). The motion for judicial notice and amended motion for judicial notice are denied as unnecessary. Thomas's pleading entitled "Review of Judicial Notice Decision," to the extent that it moves for judicial notice, is denied. Cf. FED.R.EVID. 201(a).

AFFIRMED; MOTIONS DENIED.


Summaries of

Thomas v. Ardyss Intern., Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Jul 11, 2011
432 F. App'x 361 (5th Cir. 2011)
Case details for

Thomas v. Ardyss Intern., Inc.

Case Details

Full title:Elizabeth THOMAS, Plaintiff-Appellant v. ARDYSS INTERNATIONAL…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Jul 11, 2011

Citations

432 F. App'x 361 (5th Cir. 2011)

Citing Cases

Thomas v. Dor. Eli. Cook

The Fifth Circuit affirmed the federal district court's dismissal order. Thomas v. Ardyss Int'l, Inc., 432…