Eddie Paul Munoz, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Clark County Business License Department, Defendant-appellee, 8 F.3d 28 (9th Cir. 1993)

MEMORANDUM^** 

In this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Eddie Paul Munoz (Munoz), appeals pro se the district court's granting of summary judgment for defendant Clark County Business License Department (County). The district court found Munoz's complaint was barred under the doctrine of res judicata because the issues contained therein were litigated in a previous state court action, Munoz v. Clark County Business License Dep't et al., Case No. A302849. We review de novo, see Guild Wineries and Distilleries v. Whitehall Co., 853 F.2d 755, 758 (9th Cir. 1988), and we AFFIRM.

In denying Munoz's writ of mandamus, Nev.Rev.Stat. § 34.170, the state court found Munoz did not have a claim against the County, but had an adequate remedy against the remaining defendants in trespass. This finding was affirmed by the Nevada supreme court. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) provides that, unless otherwise specified, a dismissal operates as an adjudication on the merits. A final judgment on the merits in a state court operates as a res judicata bar which precludes relitigation of a claim in federal court. Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90, 95 (1980). Accordingly, the district court's order granting summary judgment for the County is

AFFIRMED.