T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by N i nth C i r c ui tR ul e 36- 3. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T DE P AR T ME NT OF E DU C AT I ON , S T A T E O F H A W A II , P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. K A R E N I . , i n he rc apa c i ty a s pa r e nta nd le g a l g u a r d ia n o f

M a r c u s I ., D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 09- 15988 DC No . 0 8 C V- 0 2 5 5 S OM D . H a w a ii ME MORA ND UM *

DE P AR T ME NT OF E DU C AT I ON , S T A T E O F H A W A II , P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. K A R E N I . , i n he rc apa c i ty a s pa r e nta nd le g a l g u a r d ia n o f

M a r c u s I ., D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 09- 17608 DC No . 0 8 C V- 0 2 5 5 S OM D . H a w a ii 

# FI LED JU N 03 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2 A pp ea l s f

rom the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e D is tr ic t o f

H a w a ii S us a n O ki M ol l w a y , C hi e f D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d F e brua ry17, 2011

H o n o lu lu , H a w a ii S ubm i s s i on V a c a t e d F e brua ry23, 2011 R e s ubm i tt e d M a y16, 2011 B efo re: T A S H IM A , W . F L E T C H E R , an d B E R Z O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. A p p e lla n t K a r e n I . c h a lle n g e s th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s d e te rm in a tio n th a t th e S ta te of H aw ai i ’ s D epartm entof E du ca t i on (“ D O E ”) w as no tob l i gat ed t o p ayfor her son M ar cus I . ’ s r es i dent i al pl ac em entfor the 20 06 -07 schoo l ye ar . T he di stri ct c ourtha d j ur i s di c t i on unde rthe I ndi vi dua l s w i th D i s abi l i t i e s E duc a t i on A c t , 20 U. S . C . § 1 4 1 5 ( i ) ( 3 ) . We h a v e j u r i s d i c t i o n p u r s u a n tt o 2 8 U. S . C . § 1 2 9 1 , a n d we a f f i rm. 1 . T h e c o u rt re v iew s d e n o v o th e q u es ti o n o f w h eth era s ch o o l d istrict’ s p r o p o s e d in d iv id u a liz e d e d u c a tio n p r o g r a m ( “I E P ” ) p r o v id e s af r e e ap p r o p r ia te p u b lic e d u c a tio n ( “F A P E ” ) . G r eg o r yK. v . L o n g v ie w Sc h . D is t. , 811 F . 2d 1307, 1 3 1 0 ( 9 th C ir .1 9 8 7 ) . D e n o v o r e v ie w a ls o ap p lie s to ad is tr ic t c o u rt’s ru lin g th a t a c la im is b a rr e d b y th e d o c tr in e o f r e s ju d ic a ta , o rc la im p r e c lu s io n . Ste w ar t v . U . S. B a n co rp , 29 7 F . 3d 95 3, 95 6 (9th C i r. 20 02 ).3

W e l oo k t o H aw ai i l aw t o d et erm i ne w hether the st at e c ou rtj ud gm enthas p r e c lu s iv e e f

f e c t o n th e D O E ’s s u b s e q u e n t ap p e a l in f e d e r a l c o u rt. A lba no v. N orw es t Fi n. H aw ai i, Inc. , 24 4 F . 3d 10 61 , 10 63 (9th C i r. 20 01 ). “ Iti s s ett l ed l aw i n H aw ai i thatthe j ud gm entof a c ou rtof com pet entj uri sdi ct i on i s abar t o a new a c t i o n i n a n y c o u rtb e tw e e n th e s a me p a rt i e s o rth e i rp r i v i e s c o n c e rn i n g th e s a me subj ec tm att er , and p re cl ud es the re l i t i gat i on , no ton l y of the i ss ues w hi ch w er e actu al l y l i t i g at ed i n th e fi rstact i o n , b u tal so o f al l g ro u n d s o f cl ai m an d d efen se w hi c h m i ghtha ve be e n pr ope r l y l i t i ga t e d i n the f i r s ta c t i on butw e r e notl i t i ga t e d or deci ded. ” Q ual i t

yShe e t Me tal C o. v . W oods , 627 P . 2d 1128, 1130 ( H a w . C t . A pp. 1 9 8 1 ) . A t is s u e h e r e is w h e th e rth e c la im s a s s e rte d in b o th a c tio n s ar e th e s a m e . A lbano , 2 4 4 F .3 d a t 1 0 6 4 .

“ T o de t e rm i ne w he the ral i t i ga nti s a s s e rt i ng the s a m e c l a i m i n as e c ond a c t i on, the c ourtm us tl ook t o w he the rthe ‘ c l a i m ’ a s s e rt e d i n the s e c ond a c t i on a r i s e s outof

the s a m e tr a ns a c t i on, ors e r i e s of c onne c t e d tr a ns a c t i ons , a s the

‘ cl ai m ’ as se rt ed i n the fi rs tac t i on . ” Kauhane v . A c utr on C o. , 795 P . 2d 276, 279 ( H a w . 1 9 9 0 ) ( c itin g R e s ta te m e n t ( S e c o n d ) o f J u d g m e n ts § 2 4 ( 1 9 8 2 ) ) . T h e c la im m us tbe vi e w e d “ i n f

a c tua l t e rm s . . . c ot e rm i nous w i th the tr a ns a c t i on r e ga r dl e s s of th e n u m b er o f su b st an t i v e th eo ri es, o r v ari an tfo rm s o f rel i ef fl o w i n g fro m th o se theori es , thatm aybe avai l abl e t o the pl ai nt i ff . . . . ” I d. n. 6. I f the c l a i m now4

a s s e rt e d “ c oul d ha ve be e n r a i s e d i n the e a r l i e rs t a t e c ourta c t i on, ” the c l a i m s a r e the s a m e f o rth e p u rp o s e s o f

H a w a ii r e s ju d ic a taa n a ly s is . Se e P e dr i na v . Chun , 97 F .3 d 1 2 9 6 , 1 3 0 1 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 9 6 ) . H er e, K ar en I. ra i se d tw o rel at ed i ss ues i n separ at e r equest s f or an i m part i al due pr oc e s s he a r i ng. T he f i r s ti s s ue i s w he the rthe D O E w a s r e qui r e d t o pa yf or M a r c u s ’ 2 0 0 6 - 0 7 r e s id e n tia l p la c e m e n t u n d e rth e p a rtie s ’ s e ttle m e n t a g r e e m e n t. T he se cond i ss ue i s w hether the D O E w rong ful l y r ef used t o p uta r es i dent i al pl ac em enti n M ar cus’ 20 06 -07 IE P . K ar en I. ar gu es thatthe st at e c ou rtdeci ded o n lyth e f

ir s t is s u e , le a v in g th e s e c o n d is s u e f o rth e h e a r in g o f

f ic e rto d e te rm in e in the f i r s ti ns t a nc e . E ve n i f

the tw o i s s ue s a r e di s t i nc t , the ye f f e c t i ve l yf orm the sam e c l ai m because they ari se ou tof the sa m e transac t i on or se ri es of conn ec t ed tr a ns a c t i ons . K a r e n I . w a nt e d the D O E t o pa yf orM a r c us ’ r e s i de nt i a l pl a c e m e nt b e c au s e s h e b e lie v e d it w a s a“n e c e s s a ryc o m p o n e n t” o f h is e d u c a tio n a l p r o g r a m . S he ha d tw o the or i e s f

orpr e s s i ng thi s poi nt : ( 1) pa y m e ntw a s r e qui r e d unde rthe te rm s o f th e s e ttle m e n t a g r e e m e n t, a n d ( 2 ) ar e s id e n tia l p la c e m e n t w a s n e c e s s a ry to prov i de a F A P E (and thu s s ho ul d h ave been i n the IE P ). T hese theori es ar e di ff er entgrou nd s f

or re ac hi ng the sa m e out com e: thatthe D O E ac ce ptfi nanci al r e s p o n s ib ilityf

o rM a r c u s ’ 2 0 0 6 - 0 7 r e s id e n tia l p la c e m e n t. Se e Q ual i t yShe e t Me tal C o. , 627 P . 2d a t1130 ( e xpl a i ni ng tha tr e s j udi c a t a“ pr e c l ude s the r e l i t i ga t i on . . . ofB ec au se IE P s m u st b e r ee v alu ated at leas t an n u ally, th e s tate co u rt’s 1 d e c is io n d o e s n o t e x e rt p r e c lu s iv e e f f e c t o n a d ju s tm e n ts to M a r c u s ’ I E P in s u b s e q u e n t s c h o o l y e a r s , in c lu d in g d e te rm in a tio n s w h e th e rr e s id e n tia l p la c e m e n t is r e q u ir e d in o r d e rto p r o v id e aF A P E . See H aw . T el. Co. v. P ub l i c Ut i l

s. C om m ’n , 8 2 7 F .2 d 1 2 6 4 , 1 2 7 4 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 8 7 ) ( e x p la in in g th a t in c o m e ta x c la im s in s u c c e s s i v e t a x y e a r s , o rr a t e c l a i ms i n s u c c e s s i v e r a t e p r o c e e d i n g s , a r e n o tth e s a me c la im f o rr e s ju d ic a tap u rp o s e s ) . 5 a l l gr ounds of

c l a i m a nd de f

e ns e w hi c h m i ghtha ve be e n pr ope r l yl i t i ga t e d i n the f ir s t a c tio n b u t w e r e n o t litig a te d o rd e c id e d .” ) . A c c or di ngl y , the s t a t e c ourtj udgm e ntba r s the ul t i m a t e r e m e dys oughtby K ar en I. W e s ym pathi ze w i th K ar en I. ’ s argum entthatthe st at e c ou rt ’ s order s w er e uncl ear. H ow ever , the st at e c ou rtrul ed as a m att erof l aw thatthe D O E w as n o t o b lig a te d to p a y f

o rM a r c u s ’ r e s id e n tia l p la c e m e n t f o rth e 2 0 0 6 - 0 7 s c h o o l y e a r . W e a r e b o u n d b y th a t ru lin g . Se e Go v ’ t o f Gu a m v . Cr u z(

I n r e Go v ’ t

o f Gu a m) , 8 6 9 F .2 d 1 3 2 6 , 1 3 2 7 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 8 9 ) ( e x p la in in g th a t r e s ju d ic a taap p lie s “e v e n if the courti n the fi rs tl i t i gat i on w as w rong i n i t s det erm i nat i on s” ). 1 2. W e r e vi e w adi s tr i c tc ourt ’ s de ni a l of a tt orne y s ’ f

e e s f orabus e of d is c r e tio n . P ar e nt

V . S. ex r e l. Stude nt

A . O . v . L os G atos - Sar atoga J oi nt U ni on Hig h Sc h . D is t. , 484 F . 3d 1230, 1232 ( 9th C i r . 2007) . W he r e w e r e vi e w “ rul i ngs o f th e d is tr ic t c o u rt r e g a r d in g lo c a l p r a c tic e a n d lo c a l ru le s , th e ap p r o p r ia te st andard of revi ew i s abu se of di sc re t i on . ” G ua m Sa sakiC orp. v. D i an a’s, Inc. , 8 8 1 F .2 d 7 1 3 , 7 1 6 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 8 9 ) .6

H e r e , the di s tr i c tc ourtde ni e d K a r e n I . ’ s i ni t i a l m ot i on f ora tt orne y s ’ f

e e s f or fa i l ure t o com pl y w i th L ocal R ul e 54. 3(b). T he di stri ctcourtcl earl y i nstruct ed K a r e n I . tha tc a r e f

ul c om pl i a nc e w i th L oc a l R ul e 54. 3( b) w a s ne c e s s a ry . I tga ve he ras e c ond opportuni tyt o br i ng he rm ot i on a nd f i l e the r e qui r e d s t a t e m e ntof c ons ul t a t i on. K a r e n I . di d nott i m e l yf i l e the s t a t e m e nt , a nd pr e s e nt s no c om pe l l i ng e xc us e f orthe f a i l ur e t o c om pl y . U nde rthe s e c i r c um s t a nc e s , w e c onc l ude tha tthe d is tr ic t c o u rt d id n o t ab u s e its d is c r e tio n . T h e j u d g m en to f th e d i stri ctco u rti s AF F I RME D.