Legal Opinion
Janette Dunkle v. Jennifer Dale
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided August 15, 2016No. 14-36039UnpublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM *
Janette Dunkle appeals the district court’s dismissal of her complaint based on the preclusive effect of previous litigation in Alaska child in need of aid (“CINA”) proceedings. Reviewing de novo, Holder v. Holder, 305 F.3d 854, 863 (9th Cir. 2002), we reverse and remand.
1. “[F]ederal courts generally give state court judgments the same issue preclusive effect that they would be given by the rendering court.” Id. at 866. Under Alaska law, issue preclusion bars relitigation when four requirements are met:(1) the party against whom the preclusion is employed was a party to or in…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Mabe v. San Bernardino CountyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- Jeremiah W. Holder v. Carla R. Holder, Jeremiah W. Holder v. Carla R. HolderCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Smith v. StaffordAlaska Supreme Court · 2008
- State, Department of Health & Social Services, Office of Children's Services v. DohertyAlaska Supreme Court · 2007
- Powercorp Alaska, LLC v. Alaska Energy AuthorityAlaska Supreme Court · 2012
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Humphrey v. StraubeDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 2023