2010 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Third C irc uit 8-26-2010 

# Moh amed El-H ewie v

. B e rge n C ounty P re c e de nt i al or N on-P re c e de nt i al : N on-P re c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 10-1284

F o llow thi s and a ddit ion al works at : http://di git alc ommon s .l a w . vill anova . e du/thirdc irc uit_2010

Thi s de c i sion i s brou ght t o you for f re e and ope n a c c e s s by the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Third C irc uit at V ill anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2010 D e c i sion s by an authori z e d a dmini s trat or of V ill anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or more inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vill anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " M o h ame d El -H ewie v

. Be rge n C ounty " (2010). 2010 D e cisio n s . P ape r 704. http://di git alc ommon s .l a

w . vill anova . e du/thirdc irc uit_2010/704NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

___________ N o. 10- 1284

___________ M OH AM ED F. EL- HEW I E, A ppel l ant v . BERG EN C OU NTY ; BO AR D O F EDU CA TI ON OF TH E BERG EN C OU NTY V O C A T IO N A L S C H O O L D IS T R IC T ; D E N N IS M c N E R N E Y , B e rg e n C o u n ty Ex e c u t i v e ; J AC K D RA KEFO RD , Pr e s i d e n to f BO E; AA RO N R . GR AH AM , BCTS B o ard M em b er a n d B erg en C o u n tyS u p erinten d en t; B E R N I L Y N N K O C H , B C T S B o ard Vi c e P r e s i d e n t ; LAZ ARO CARVA J AL, BCT S Bo a r d M e mb e r ; ANG EL A TAYLOR, BCTS Boa r d M e mbe r ; RO BERT J . ALO I A, Su p e r i n t e n d e n t ; THO M AS K LEM M , Di r e c t o ro f

Hu ma n Re s o u r c e s ; RAYM OND J . VOLP E, S u p e rv i s o r ; RI CHARD PAN I CU CCI , Su p e rv i s o r ; PATRI CI A T. CO SGRO VE, Ex - Sc h o o l p r i n c i p a l ; RU SS ELL DAVI S , Vi c e P r i n c i p a l ; DE NNI S M ONT ONE , S u p e rv i s o r ; J OS E P H HOL BR OOK, T e a c h e r ; L I NDA E I CK M E YE R, T e a c h e r ; L I NDA T HE OS , M a n a g e r ; BR ADL E Y M . W I LS ON, Bo a r d At t o rn e y , a n d ; W I LL I AM C. S OUK AS, Bo a r d At t o rn e y ; ROBER T R. HI GGI NS ; NE W J E RS E Y OF F I CE OF ADMI NI S T RA T I VE L AW; HON. M A R G A R E T M . M O N A C O ; L U C IL L E E . D A V Y ; D E P A R T M E N T O F L A W P U B L IC S AF E T Y DI VI S I ON OF L AW; NE W J E RS E Y DE P AR T M E NT OF E DUC AT I ON

____________________________________ O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt

forthe D i s tr i ctof N ew J er s ey D . C . C i vi l A ct i on N o. 08- cv- 01760 ( H onor abl e Fai th S. H ochber g)

____________________________________ Subm i tt ed Pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

A ugus t13, 2010 B efore: S C IR IC A , JO R D A N and V A N A S K IE, C i rcui tJudg es.

( Fi l ed: A ugus t26, 2010)2 ___________ OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

___________ P E R C U R I A M. W hi l e M ohamed E l - H ew i e w as chal l engi ng the t erm i nat i on of hi s empl oym entas a pr ovi s i onal t eac herw i th the B oar d of Educat i on of the B er gen C ountyV ocat i onal School D i s tr i ct( “the B oar d”) i n s t at e admi ni s tr at i ve pr ocee di ngs , he al s o fi l ed a compl ai nti n the U ni t ed St at es D i s tr i ctC our tforthe D i s tr i ctof N ew J er s eyr ai s i ng e ss e n tiallyth e sa m e c laim s. T h e D istric t C o u rt g ra n ted th e d e f e n d a n ts’ m o tio n s to di s m i s s . O n appea l , w e af fi rm ed the di s m i s s al of the maj or i tyof cl ai m s , butvaca t ed that p o r t i o n o f

th e Di s tr i c tCo u r t ’ s o r d e rth a td i s mi s s e d El - He wi e ’ s 4 2 U. S . C. § 1 9 8 1 c l a i ms on r es j udi cat a gr ounds beca us e theyhad bee n l i t i gat ed bef or e the A dm i ni s tr at i ve Law J udge ( “A L J ”) . See El - H ew i e v. B er gen C ounty , C . A . N o. 08- 4900, 348 Fed. A ppx. 790 (3 d C ir. S e p t. 17 , 2 0 0 9 ). In p a rticu lar , w e c o n c lu d e d th a t th e D istric t C o u rt f a iled to addr es s w hetherN ew J er s eycourt s w oul d gi ve pr ecl us i ve ef fec tt o the dec i s i on of the C o m m iss io n e r o f

E d u c a tio n (“ th e C o m m iss io n e r” ) to a d o p t th e A L J’s d ism iss a l o f E lH ew i e’ s empl oym entdi s cr i m i nat i on cl ai m s . See U ni v. of Tenn. v. E l l i ot t , 478 U . S. 788, 799 ( 1986) ( “[W ] hen a s t at e age ncy‘ act i ng i n a j udi ci al capa ci ty. . . r es ol ves di s put ed iss u e s o f f a c t p ro p e rlyb e f

o re it w h ich th e p a rties h a v e h a d a n a d e q u a te o p p o rtu n ityto l i t i gat e, ’ . . . fede r al court s m us tgi ve the age ncy ’ s fac t fi ndi ng the s ame pr ecl us i ve ef fec tW e h av e jurisdicti o n p u rsua n t t o 2 8 U . S . C . § 1 2 9 1 , an d m ayaf firm the D istri ct C o u rt 1 on anybas i s s uppor t ed bythe r ecor d. See Fai rvi ew T w p. v. E PA , 773 F. 2d 517, 525 n. 15 ( 3d C i r . 1985) ; s ee a l s o M cTernan v. C i tyof Y ork, 577 F. 3d 521, 526 ( 3d C i r . 2009) (s ta tin g th a t th e “ c o u rtm a yta k e ju d ic ia l n o tic e o f a p ri o r j u d ic ia l o p in io n .” ). 3 t o w hi ch i tw oul d be ent i t l ed i n the St at e’ s court s . ”) ( quot i ng U ni t ed St at es v. U t ah C o n s tr . & M in in g C o ., 3 8 4 U .S . 3 9 4 , 4 2 2 (1 9 6 6 )) ). Fol l ow i ng ourr emand, the D i s tr i ctC our tdi s m i s s ed the § 1981 cl ai m s , fi ndi ng

“ th a t N e w Je rse yc o u rts w o u ld g iv e p re c lu siv e e f f e c t to th e A L J’s d e ter m in a tio n th a t [ E lH ew i e] di d notper form hi s j ob s at i s fac t or i l yand thatther e w as no evi dence thatthe B o ard d iscri m inated ag ains t him . ” E l- H ew ie ap p ea led a g ain. In the m ea n ti m e, ho w ev er, th e N e w Je rse yS u p e rio r C o u rt a f f irm e d th e d e c isio n o f

th e C o m m iss io n e r. S e e E l-H e w ie v. B oar d of Educ. , N o. A - 6310- 07T 3, 2009 W L 4981212 ( N . J . Super . C t . A pp. D i v. , D ec. 24, 2009) , and the Supr eme C our tof N ew J er s eydeni ed El - H ew i e’ s pet i t i on for c e r t i f i c a t i o n . S e e E l - H e w i e , v . B o a r d o f E d u c . , 9 9 2 A . 2 d 7 9 2 ( N . J . 2 0 1 0 ) . C o n s e q u e n t l y, w e mustnow det erm i ne w hetherthe Super i orC our t ’ s deci s i on i s ent i t l ed t o pr ecl us i ve e f f e c t. 1

“ T h e F u ll F a ith a n d C re d it A c t, 28 U .S .C . § 1 7 3 8 , . . . re q u ire s th e f e d e ra l co u rt to ‘g iv e th e sa m e p re c lu siv e e f f e c t to a sta te- c o u rt ju d g m e n t as a n o th e r c o u rt o f th a t S tate w oul d gi ve. ’ ” Exxon M obi l C orp. v. Saudi B as i c I ndus . C orp. , 544 U . S. 280, 293 ( 2005) ( ci t i ng Par s ons St eel , I nc. v. Fi r s tA l abama B ank, 474 U . S. 518, 523 ( 1986) ) . I n N ew J er s ey , cl ai m pr ecl us i on has thr ee ba s i c el ement s : ( 1) the j udgm enti n the pr i oract i onC ontr aryt o E l - H ew i e’ s as s ert i ons , the s t at e courtj udgm enti n hi s cas e cons t i tut ed a 2 f u l l a n d f a i ra d j u d i c a t i o n o f

h i s e mp l o yme n td i s c r i mi n a t i o n c l a i ms . S e e Ke l l e yv . T YK (c o n tin u e d ...) 4 m us tbe val i d, fi nal , and on the mer i t s ; ( 2) the part i es i n the l at eract i on m us tbe i dent i cal t o o r i n p ri vityw i th those i n the pri or act i on ; and (3) the clai m i n the l at er act i on m ust gr ow outof the s ame t r ans act i on oroccurr ence as the cl ai m i n the ea r l i erone. See M cN ei l v. L egis l at i ve A pp ort i on m ent C om m ’n, 82 8 A . 2d 84 0, 85 9 (N . J. 20 03 ). T hese el ement s ar e s at i s fi ed bythe fa ct s of thi s cas e. T h e S u p e rio r C o u rt c o n c lu d e d , inte r a lia, th a t “th e A L J p ro p e rlyf o u n d th a t [ E lH e w ie] f a iled to su sta in h is b u rd e n u n d e r th e b u rd e n -sh if tin g f ra m e w o rk a p p lica b le to di s cr i m i nat i on cl ai m s . ” El - H ew i e, 2009 W L 4981212, at*7. T hi s i s a val i d deci s i on on th e m e rits, w h ich b e c a m e f in a l w h e n th e S u p re m e C o u rt o f N e w Je rse yd e n ied E lH ew i e’ s pet i t i on forcert i or ar i . See D avi s v. U . S. St eel Suppl y , 688 F. 2d 166, 172- 73 ( 3d C ir. 1 9 8 2 ) (e n b a n c ) (h o ld in g th a t th e re w a s a m e rits a d ju d ica tio n f

o r re s ju d ica ta pu rposes w here the st at e cou rtfou nd that “‘ no ne o f the [a dm i nis trat i ve] ( C om m i ssi on ’s ) fi ndi ngs i s s uffi ci entt o s uppor tthe C om m i s s i on’ s concl us i on’ ” thatthe empl oy er di s cr i m i nat ed aga i ns tthe empl oy ee be caus e of he rr ace ) . M or eover , the B oar d – the re sp o n d e n t in th e sta te c o u rt a c tio n – w a s n a m e d in E l-H e w ie’ s f e d e ra l co m p lain t an d is i n pr i vi tyw i th the otherdefe ndant s agai ns tw hom E l - H ew i e r ai s ed al l egat i ons of di s cr i m i nat i on. Fi nal l y , E l - H ew i e’ s § 1981 cl ai m s and the di s cr i m i nat i on cl ai m s ati s s ue in sta te c o u rt b o th ste m f ro m th e B o a rd ’s te rm in a tio n o f h is e m p lo ym e n t. 2( . . . cont i nued) 2 Re f r a c t o r i e s Co . , 8 6 0 F . 2 d 1 1 8 8 , 1 1 9 7 - 9 8 ( 3 d Ci r . 1 9 8 8 ) ( r e c o g n i z i n g th a ti n Da v i s “ we hel d thata s t at e courtj udgm entr ever s i ng on the mer i t s a fi ndi ng of empl oym ent di s cr i m i nat i on bythe Pi t t s bur gh C om m i s s i on on H um an R el at i ons cons t i tut ed ful l and fai radj udi cat i on of D avi s ’ s r ace di s cr i m i nat i on cl ai m , s o thatherfede r al act i on under § 1 9 8 1 w as b arred b yres jud icata.” (cit ing D av is, 6 8 8 F . 2 d at 17 3 )). T he M ot i on forL eave t o Fi l e B r i ef O utof Ti m e fi l ed on beha l f of the “Educat i on 10- 3 1284 D efe ndant s , ” and s ubm i t t ed on A ugus t6, 2010, i s deni ed. See L. A . R . 31. 4. 5 F o r th e f o re g o in g re a so n s, w e w ill a f f irm th e ju d g m e n t o f

th e D istric t C o u rt. 3