Filed: Jun. 06, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 17-3120 _ Tynisha Latrice Reinerio, now known as Akosua Tanisha Aaebo lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant v. Bank of America N.A.; Countrywide Financial Corporation; Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.; CWAB, Inc.; Bank of New York Mellon; Southlaw P.C. lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City _ Submitted: June 1, 2018 Filed: June 6, 2018 [U
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 17-3120 _ Tynisha Latrice Reinerio, now known as Akosua Tanisha Aaebo lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant v. Bank of America N.A.; Countrywide Financial Corporation; Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.; CWAB, Inc.; Bank of New York Mellon; Southlaw P.C. lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City _ Submitted: June 1, 2018 Filed: June 6, 2018 [Un..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 17-3120
___________________________
Tynisha Latrice Reinerio, now known as Akosua Tanisha Aaebo
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant
v.
Bank of America N.A.; Countrywide Financial Corporation; Countrywide Home
Loans, Inc.; CWAB, Inc.; Bank of New York Mellon; Southlaw P.C.
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
____________
Submitted: June 1, 2018
Filed: June 6, 2018
[Unpublished]
____________
Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Akosua Tanisha Aaebo, formerly known as Tynisha Latrice Reinerio, appeals
from the order of the District Court1 dismissing her claims as barred by res judicata
and denying her motion to remand. She has also filed a motion in this Court for
judicial notice.
After de novo review, we conclude that the District Court did not err in
dismissing Aaebo’s claims. See C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. v. Lobrano,
695 F.3d
758, 763–64 (8th Cir. 2012) (standard of review); see also Chesterfield Vill., Inc. v.
City of Chesterfield,
64 S.W.3d 315, 318–20 (Mo. 2002) (applying the Missouri
common-law doctrine of claim preclusion); U.S. Fid. & Guar. Co. v. Commerical
Union Ins. Co.,
943 S.W.2d 640, 642 (Mo. 1997) (“The granting of a motion to
dismiss for failure to state a claim is a final judgment on the merits sufficient to raise
the defense of res judicata in a later proceeding.”). We further conclude that the
District Court did not err in denying Aaebo’s motion to remand. See Block v. Toyota
Motor Corp.,
665 F.3d 944, 947–48 (8th Cir. 2011) (reviewing de novo the denial of
a motion to remand and explaining the fraudulent joinder standard).
We affirm the judgment of the District Court and deny Aaebo’s pending
motion.
______________________________
1
The Honorable Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr., United States District Judge for the
Western District of Missouri.
-2-