Walter H. Bullwinkle v. State of Alaska

988 F.2d 118 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Walter H. BULLWINKLE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STATE OF ALASKA, Defendant-Appellee. No. 92-35591. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Feb. 11, 1993. * Decided Feb. 22, 1993. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Alaska, No. CV-91-034-JKS; James K. Singleton, District Judge, Presiding. D.Alaska AFFIRMED. Before GOODWIN, SCHROEDER and CANBY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Walter H. Bullwinkle appeals pro se the district court's summary judgment in favor of defendant, the State of Alaska (the "State"). 1 The district court held that the issues raised by Bullwinkle had been raised and adjudicated in an earlier action in Alaska state superior court and, therefore, Bullwinkle was barred by the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel from relitigating those issues and claims. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm. 3 We review the…