Stein

Stein v. Braum Investment & Development, Inc.

Good Law
244 F. App'x 816
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 6, 2007No. 05-56289California1,562 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

On June 16, 2004, Appellants Lawrence Chaim Stein (“Appellant Stein”) and Marc Hutson-Montroy (collectively “Appellants”) filed this amended action against Appellees Braum Investment and Development, Inc., Michael Braum and Torat Hayim (“Appellees”) asserting Fair Housing Act (“FHA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601 , et seq, and other claims based upon discrimination arising from Appellants’ tenancy with Appellees. On July 25, 2005, the district court after raising, sua sponte, the availability and application of res judicata and collateral estoppel dismissed Appellants’ FHA action based upon a prior unlawful detainer judgment obtained by Appellees against Appellant Stein in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles (the “Superior Court”). The Appellants then instituted this timely appeal. We reverse and remand.

ANALYSIS

I. Standard of Review

This Court reviews de novo a district court’s ruling on the availability of res judicata both as to res judicata and collateral estoppel. Robi v. Five Platters, Inc., 838 F.2d 318 , 321 (9th Cir.1988) (citations omitted). “The preclusive effect of a judgment in a prior case presents a mixed question of law and fact in which…

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.