Hott
Hott v. City of San Jose
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Plaintiff Wanda Hott appeals from the district court’s dismissal of her case. On de novo review, we affirm.
Plaintiff challenges the San Jose towing ordinance that was enforced against her as preempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (FAAAA). That argument is procedurally barred.
In a state court proceeding that she brought to review the administrative enforcement action, Plaintiff had the opportunity to — and did — raise this preemption argument. The state court held that the FAAAA did not preempt the San Jose ordinance. A state court’s judgment is preclusive even with respect to a federal claim, Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90, 105 , 101 S.Ct. 411 , 66 L.Ed.2d 308 (1980), if the state’s requirements for the application of the doctrine are met.
Here, the issue preclusion requirements of California law are met. The question decided in the state court action was the same as the one now raised, the prior judgment was final and on the merits, and Plaintiff was a party to the earlier action. See Producers Dairy Delivery Co. v. Sentry Ins. Co., 41 Cal.3d 903 , 226 Cal.Rptr. 558 , 718 P.2d 920, 923 (Cal.1986) (stating requirements for issue…