713 Fed.Appx. 647 (9th Cir. 2018), 16-36055, Szmania v. E-Loan, Inc.
|Citation:||713 Fed.Appx. 647|
|Party Name:||Daniel G. SZMANIA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. E-LOAN, INC.; et al., Defendants-Appellees.|
|Attorney:||Daniel G. Szmania, Pro Se John S. Devlin, III, Esquire, Abraham K. Lorber, Attorney, Lane Powell PC, Seattle, WA, for Defendants-Appellees Bear Stearns Arm Trust, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., John G. Stumpf Scott Douglas Crawford, Zieve, Brodnax & Steele, LLP, Portland, OR, for Benjamin D. Petiprin|
|Judge Panel:||Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.|
|Case Date:||February 23, 2018|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit|
Submitted February 13, 2018 [*]
Governing the citation to unpublished opinions please refer to federal rules of appellate procedure rule 32.1. See also U.S.Ct. of App. 9th Cir. Rule 36-3.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, Ronald B. Leighton, District Judge, Presiding, D.C. No. 3:16-cv-05644-RBL
Daniel G. Szmania, Pro Se
John S. Devlin, III, Esquire, Abraham K. Lorber, Attorney, Lane Powell PC, Seattle, WA, for Defendants-Appellees Bear Stearns Arm Trust, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., John G. Stumpf
Scott Douglas Crawford, Zieve, Brodnax & Steele, LLP, Portland, OR, for Benjamin D. Petiprin
Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Daniel G. Szmania appeals pro se from the district courts judgment dismissing his
diversity action arising from foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
Knievel v. ESPN, 393 F.3d 1068, 1072 (9th Cir. 2005). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Szmanias claim that defendants lacked authority to foreclose as barred by the doctrine of res judicata because this claim was raised or could have been raised in a previous action between the parties or their privies that resulted in a final judgment on the merits. See Holcombe v. Hosmer, 477 F.3d 1094, 1097 (9th Cir. 2007) (federal courts apply state law regarding the res judicata effect of state court judgments); Williams v. Leone & Keeble, Inc., 171 Wn.2d 726, 254 P.3d 818, 821 (2011) (en banc) (setting forth elements of the doctrine of res judicata under Washington law); Southcenter Joint Venture v. Natl Democratic Policy Comm., 113 Wn.2d 413, 780 P.2d 1282, 1285 (1989) (en banc) ("[A] successor in interest to a party to an action that determines interests in property is subject to the preclusive...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP