Cahill

Cahill v. U.S. Department of Labor

Good Law
125 F. App'x 174
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 4, 2005No. 04-15726; D.C. No. CV-03-00172-CKJ/GEECalifornia219 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*175 MEMORANDUM **

Brett Cahill appeals pro se the district court’s order dismissing his action alleging that the Department of Labor and Labor Secretary Elaine Chao violated his constitutional rights by preventing him from disseminating information through a federally-sponsored job placement service. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a district court’s decision regarding issue preclusion, Littlejohn v. United States, 321 F.3d 915, 919 (9th Cir.2003), and we affirm.

Cahill’s current action is identical in all material aspects to the action he litigated in federal court in the middle district of Florida and the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in 1993. Because it was previously ruled that Cahill lacked standing to bring suit against defendants in this matter, Ca-hill is precluded from relitigating this same issue against the same parties here. See id. at 923 (collateral estoppel prevents re-litigation of all issues of fact or law that were actually litigated and necessarily decided in a prior proceeding). Thus, the district court properly dismissed Cahill’s action. See Town of North Bonneville v. Callaway, 10 F.3d 1505, 1508 (9th…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.