Griffin, Jr. v. Whitefield, NH

Not for Publication in West's Federal Reporter
United States Court of Appeals
For the First Circuit
No. 08-2158
JOHN R. GRIFFIN, JR.,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
WHITEFIELD, NH, ET AL.,
Defendants, Appellees.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
[Hon. Joseph N. Laplante, U.S. District Judge]
Before
Lynch, Chief Judge,
Boudin and Stahl, Circuit Judges.
John R. Griffin, Jr., on brief pro se.
R. Matthew Cairns and Gallagher, Callahan & Gartrell, P.C.,
on brief for appellees.
August 13, 2009
Per Curiam. After a thorough review of the record
and of the parties' submissions, we affirm. This court reviews
de novo the district court's rulings regarding the preclusive
effect of a prior judgment under res judicata principles. See
Coors Brewing Co. v. Mendez-Torres, 562 F.3d 3, 8 (1st Cir.
2009) (citation omitted). "A federal court is generally bound
under res judicata to give the same preclusive effect to a
state court judgment as would be given to it by a local court
within that state. [] This is true regardless whether the
state-court decision involves federal or state law." FPL
Energy Maine Hydro LLC v. F.E.R.C., 551 F.3d 58, 63 (1st Cir.
2008). Under New Hampshire law,
Res judicata precludes the litigation in a
later case of matters actually decided,
and matters that could have been
litigated, in an earlier action between
the same parties for the same cause of
action. [] For the doctrine to apply,
three elements must be met: (1) the
parties must be the same or in privity
with one another; (2) the same cause of
action must be before the court in both
instances; and (3) a final judgment on the
merits must have been rendered in the
first action.
Meier v. Town of Littleton, 154 N.H. 340, 342, 910 A.2d 1243,
1245 (2006) (citation omitted).
In this instance, the parties clearly are the same.
In all three cases, appellant John R. Griffin, Jr. ("Griffin")
sued the Town of Whitefield, New Hampshire, Officer Richard
-2-
Brown and Officer Shawn White; he also named Justice of the
Peace Judith Ramsdell in the 2007 action and in the federal
suit. Likewise, the same causes of action have been before the
courts in all three cases. Under New Hampshire law, in order
to determine whether the same causes of action were present in
both cases, the court considers whether the causes of action
arise out of the same transaction or occurrence. See Sleeper
v. Hoban Family Partnership, 157 N.H. 530, 534, 955 A.2d 879,
883 (2008) (citing In re University Syst. of New Hampshire, 147
N.H. 626, 629, 795 A.2d 840, 843 (2002)). Here, all three
actions clearly arise out of the same transaction or
occurrence, i.e., Griffin's arrest in August 2004 on a charge
that he violated a protection order. A final judgment on the
merits has been rendered in the state court as to all
defendants as well.
Griffin complains that the state trial judge who
heard his first case was prejudiced against him; but Griffin's
remedy for any alleged prejudice was to appeal the trial
judge's decision to the New Hampshire Supreme Court, and
Griffin apparently failed to pursue this remedy in a timely
manner. Because Griffin did not effectively pursue this
remedy, the state trial judge's decision is final and must be
respected by this court under res judicata principles.
-3-
Appellant's Motion for Status Report is denied as
moot. Appellant's Motion to Compel Documentation as Evidence
is denied. Appellant's Motion for Punitive Damages is denied.
Affirmed. See 1st Cir. R. 27.0(c).
-4-