Barreto-Rosa v. Varona-Mendez, No. 05-2749. An ALJ sued in commonwealth court, seeking relief from a transfer to a post she didn’t want to go to, because, you guessed it, political discrimination. Her claim was initially dismissed and while her commonwealth appeal was pending, she filed a § 1983 action in Federal Court. The US District Court abstained under Colorado River Water Conservation Dist. v. United States, 424 U.S. 800 (1976), and refrained from applying res judicata because, since the Puerto Rican court’s judgment was on appeal, it was not final and appealable. But, the Puerto Rico court of appeals vacated the dismissal and remanded it. Then, plaintiff asked the lower Puerto Rico court to let her voluntarily dismiss, which it did. In the state court, the defendants then asserted res judicata. While the a magistrate initially held that the plaintiffs claims were not barred because of Calderon-Rosado v. Gen. Elec. Circuit Breakers, 805 F.2d 1085, 1087 (1st Cir. 1986) (if a defendant fails to object to claim splitting prior to an adjudication on the merits of the first claim, the res judicata defense may be deemed waived in the second claim), a District Court disagrees.
The court holds that since Puerto Rican law accords both issue and claim preclusive effect, and voluntary dismissals with prejudice are considered final and appealable under Puerto Rico law. Moreover her “England v. Louisiana State Bd. of Medical Exam’rs, 375 U.S. 411 (1964)” reservation didn’t apply because she didn’t identify any unsettled state law questions.
The First upholds, and holds that her tactical error can’t won’t fit within Calderon-Rosado or any public policy exceptions to res judicata.
Comments