Opinion ID: 901628
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Law Library

Text: [¶ 16.] Smith's final claim involves the alleged closing of the law library. However, this claim is also barred by res judicata and collateral estoppel. The federal suit also involved the question whether the closing of the law library denied access to the courts. See supra, ¶¶ 13-14. Smith raises the same argument here under the State Constitution. His complaint alleged that: In order to satisfy the [South Dakota Constitution's] mandate requiring meaningful access to courts Article VI of the SDC. [ sic ] Plaintiffs were provided with a legal library. . . . Weber closed the legal library. Because this is the same issue, and Smith's legal claim either was or could have been considered in the federal suit, it is barred by res judicata or collateral estoppel. See supra, ¶ 13.