Case Name: Robert WILLIAMS; Robert Williams, as Trustee for the Legacy VI Trust, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Ryan ZINKE, Secretary of the Department of the Interior; Gregory Marengo; First American Title Company; Bureau of Indian Affairs, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-03-21
Citations: 683 F. App'x 653
Docket Number: No. 14-36057
Parties: Robert WILLIAMS; Robert Williams, as Trustee for the Legacy VI Trust, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Ryan ZINKE, Secretary of the Department of the Interior; Gregory Marengo; First American Title Company; Bureau of Indian Affairs, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before: O’SCANNLAIN, FISHER and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 683
Pages: 653–654

Head Matter:
Robert WILLIAMS; Robert Williams, as Trustee for the Legacy VI Trust, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Ryan ZINKE, Secretary of the Department of the Interior; Gregory Marengo; First American Title Company; Bureau of Indian Affairs, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 14-36057
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 9, 2017 Portland, Oregon
Filed March 21, 2017
Richard Buley, Esquire, Torrance L. Coburn, Esquire, Tipp & Buley, P.C., Mis-soula, MT, for Plaintiffs-Appellants
Victoria L. Francis, Office of the US Attorney, Billings, MT, for Defendants-Ap-pellees Sally Jewell, Bureau of Indian Affairs
Robert J. Long, Esquire, Long Law Office, Poison, MT, for Defendant-Appellee Gregory Marengo
Kelsey Evans Bunkers, Attorney, Crowley Fleck PLLP, Bozeman, MT, Michael Dockery, Crowley Fleck PLLP, Billings, MT, Benjamin P. Hursh, Attorney, Crowley Fleck, PLLP, Missoula, MT, for Defendant-Appellee First American Title Company
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, FISHER and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Ryan Zinke has been substituted for Sally Jewell pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 43(c).
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Robert Williams appeals the district court's order granting First American Title Company's motion to dismiss based on res judicata and collateral estoppel. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Williams' claim for breach of the title insurance contract because that claim was previously decided by a Montana state court. Under Montana law, res judicata "bars a party from relitigating a matter that she has already had an opportunity to litigate." Baltrusch v. Baltrusch, 331 Mont. 281, 130 P.3d 1267, 1273 (2006). Here, the dispute is whether Williams holds title to certain property in fee simple or whether it remains in trust status, with title held by the United States. Although Williams argues otherwise, that precise question was resolved by the Lake County, Montana district court in a previous title insurance claim Williams brought against First American. Moreover, because Williams both raised' and extensively briefed the fee-versus-trust question before the state court, his contention that he did not have a full and fair opportunity to litigate this claim fails. Res judicata bars Williams from relitigating the title insurance claim here.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
. Montana's claim preclusion rules control. See McDonald v. City of West Branch, Mich., 466 U.S. 284, 287, 104 S.Ct. 1799, 80 L.Ed.2d 302 (1984); 28 U.S.C. § 1738.