Robert Gallagher v. Richard Long , 358 F. App'x 990 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                            FILED
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT                              DEC 17 2009
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    ROBERT G. GALLAGHER, AKA Bobby                   No. 08-16418
    Freeman; BETTY FRANKLIN,
    D.C. No. 3:07-cv-00223-BES-
    Plaintiffs - Appellants,            RAM
    and
    MEMORANDUM *
    JOHN FALCONI,
    Plaintiff,
    v.
    RICHARD S. LONG; CYNTHIA A.
    LONG; TRUSTEES FOR THE
    RICHARD S. AND CYNTHIA A. LONG
    TRUST; LGF ENTERPRISES, LLC,
    Defendants - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the District of Nevada
    Brian E. Sandoval, District Judge, Presiding
    Argued and Submitted October 7, 2009
    San Francisco, California
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    Before: SCHROEDER and BERZON, Circuit Judges, and STROM, ** District
    Judge.
    Plaintiffs Robert Gallagher and Betty Franklin appeal the district court’s
    dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) of their diversity
    action against Richard and Cynthia Long, the Long trust, and a related company.
    The complaint alleged that the Longs had breached a settlement agreement
    intended to resolve a longstanding dispute over the parties’ interest in a collection
    of celebrity memorabilia.
    The underlying dispute was litigated in the courts of Delaware and resulted
    in a final judgment in favor of the Longs. This action was instituted while the
    Delaware litigation was still pending. There is no reason why the claims sought to
    be litigated here could not have been raised in the Delaware litigation, and for that
    reason the district court correctly dismissed the action as barred by res judicata. As
    our court has stated, res judicata means that “a final judgment on the merits of an
    action precludes the parties or their privies from relitigating issues that were or
    could have been raised in that action.” Holcombe v. Hosmer, 
    477 F.3d 1094
    , 1097
    (9th Cir. 2007) (quoting Allen v. McCurry, 
    449 U.S. 90
    , 93 (1980)). The same
    **
    The Honorable Lyle E. Strom, Senior United States District Judge for
    the District of Nebraska, sitting by designation.
    2
    principle has been recognized by the courts of Delaware. LaPoint v.
    AmerisourceBergen Corp., 
    970 A.2d 185
    , 191-92 (Del. 2009).
    AFFIRMED.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 08-16418

Citation Numbers: 358 F. App'x 990

Judges: Schroeder, Berzon, Strom

Filed Date: 12/17/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024