Case ID: f-appx_12/html/0601-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Harold W. SAMPSON, III, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. State of CALIFORNIA, Defendant Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District, Defendant—Appellee.
    No. 01-55012.
    D.C. No. CV-00-00749-RJT.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted June 11, 2001.
    
    Decided June 25, 2001.
    
      Before O’SCANNLAIN, SILVERMAN, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a). The motion for oral argument filed September 27, 1999 is denied.
    
   MEMORANDUM

Harold W. Sampson appeals the district court’s orders granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) and declining jurisdiction over Sampson’s pendent state law claims. The facts and prior proceedings are known to the parties; they are not restated herein except as necessary.

I

The district court did not err in granting the motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6). Sampson’s cause of action had already been determined on its merits between the same parties in the state eminent domain proceeding. Sampson’s federal suit thus is barred by res judicata and the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the United States Constitution. Parsons Steel, Inc. v. First Alabama Bank, 474 U.S. 518, 523, 106 S.Ct. 768, 88 L.Ed.2d 877 (1986).

II

The district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to retain jurisdiction over Sampson’s state law claims. See Binder v. Gillespie, 184 F.3d 1059, 1066 (9th Cir.1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1154, 120 S.Ct. 1158, 145 L.Ed.2d 1070 (2000).

AFFIRMED 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.