Hathaway v. City of Claremont ( 1997 )

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
No. 96-2193
SHAUN HATHAWAY,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
CITY OF CLAREMONT,
Defendant, Appellee.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
[Hon. Joseph A. DiClerico, U.S. District Judge]
Before
Torruella, Chief Judge,
Campbell, Senior Circuit Judge,
and Boudin, Circuit Judge.
Donald L. Lader, Jr. and Law Offices of Michael C. Shklar on
brief for appellant.
Edward B. Mulligan, IV and Gallagher, Callahan & Gartrell, P.A.
on brief for appellee.
MARCH 27, 1997
Per Curiam. The judgment is affirmed substantially for
the reasons enumerated by Chief Judge DiClerico in his order
dated September 16, 1996. Appellant has advanced no reason
to question the careful analysis of claim-preclusion
principles there set forth. The contention that appellee
waived or forfeited such defense by failing to assert it in
timely fashion, see, e.g., Calderon Rosado v. General Elec.
Circuit Breakers, Inc., 805 F.2d 1085, 1087 (1st Cir. 1986)
(citing Restatement (Second) of Judgments 26(1)(a)), is
raised for the first time on appeal. We thus review that
claim for "plain error" indicative of a "clear miscarriage of
justice." Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Public Serv. Comm'n,
906 F.2d 25, 40 (1st Cir. 1990) (internal quotation omitted).
We see neither plain error nor a miscarriage of justice.
Affirmed. See Loc. R. 27.1.
-2-