Filed: Dec. 01, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 05-3704 _ Michael Jacobson, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Nebraska. Solid Waste Agency of Northwest * Nebraska, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. * _ Submitted: November 27, 2006 Filed: December 1, 2006 _ Before RILEY, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Michael Jacobson appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action.
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 05-3704 _ Michael Jacobson, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Nebraska. Solid Waste Agency of Northwest * Nebraska, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. * _ Submitted: November 27, 2006 Filed: December 1, 2006 _ Before RILEY, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Michael Jacobson appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. ..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 05-3704
___________
Michael Jacobson, *
*
Appellant, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the
* District of Nebraska.
Solid Waste Agency of Northwest *
Nebraska, * [UNPUBLISHED]
*
Appellee. *
___________
Submitted: November 27, 2006
Filed: December 1, 2006
___________
Before RILEY, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Michael Jacobson appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary
judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Having carefully reviewed the record, we
agree with the district court that Jacobson’s claims are barred under Nebraska law
because he seeks to bring the same claims he brought, or could have brought, in his
prior state-court action. See Misischia v. St. John’s Mercy Health Sys.,
457 F.3d 800,
1
The Honorable F.A. Gossett, III, United States Magistrate Judge for the
District of Nebraska, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent
of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
804 (8th Cir. 2006) (preclusive effect of prior state-court judgment is governed by law
of state in which judgment was rendered), petition for cert. filed, (U.S. Nov. 2, 2006)
(No. 06-623); Carter v. Kansas City S. Ry. Co.,
456 F.3d 841, 848 (8th Cir. 2006) (de
novo review); Eicher v. Mid America Fin. Inv. Corp.,
702 N.W.2d 792, 809 (Neb.
2005) (elements of res judicata). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
-2-