Standing Both the federal district court and the state trial court determined that appellants lacked standing to pursue an independent cause of action. The federal magistrate judge reasoned that appellants lacked standing because they had suffered no injury that was fairly traceable to respondents. We determine that appellants' assertion of standing is also barred under the rule of res judicata, the issue having been litigated in appellants' prior federal suits and in their motion to intervene in their landlords' state suit. An abuse of discretion standard is applied to a district court's decision on sanctions under Minn. Stat. Respondents filed a notice of review and argued that monetary sanctions are insufficient to deter appellants' course of vexatious litigation.
Respondents request an injunction for five years to prevent further litigation.
Although respondent correctly asserts that these numerous lawsuits are inappropriate, the cause for additional sanctions is not sufficiently evident on the record to permit substitution of our judgment for the trial court's exercise of discretion.