Anthony G. Petrello v. Matthew W. Prucka, Sheryl S. Prucka, Rahul Nath and Usha Nath, 415 S.W.3d 420

Petrello offered $6.5 million to buy 8 Remington Lane; Prucka listed for $8.3 million.
Petrello alleged oral right of first refusal; Prucka claimed only information to submit higher offers.
Federal court dismissed Petrello’s discrimination/conspiracy claims as a matter of law; remanded remaining state-law claims for adjudication.
Petrello nonsuited several state and common-law claims in federal court; only housing-discrimination claims remained in federal action.
Federal final judgment held Petrello took nothing on federal, state, and city discrimination claims; conditions remanded for state-law issues, including Nath’s title/fees.
Petrello filed a state-court petition reasserting the housing claims and rearguing the nonsuited state-common-law claims; trial court granted summary judgment precluding those claims under res judicata.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether res judicata bars Petrello’s state suit	Petrello contends remand preserved live state claims.	Prucka/Nath argue same nucleus of operative facts; final federal judgment forecloses.	Yes; final federal judgment bars state claims under res judicata.
Whether the federal judgment was final and rendered by a competent court for res judicata	Petrello disputes finality due to remanded state claims.	Final judgment on merits; voluntary nonsuit does not defeat finality.	Final judgment was final for res judicata purposes.

Test Masters Educ. Servs., Inc. v. Singh, 428 F.3d 559 (5th Cir. 2005) (tests same nucleus of operative facts for res judicata (transactional test))
Agrilectric Power Partners, Ltd. v. Gen. Elec. Co., 20 F.3d 663 (5th Cir. 1994) (same nucleus of operative facts extends preclusion to related claims)
Nilsen v. City of Moss Point, Miss., 701 F.2d 556 (5th Cir. 1983) (final judgment on merits bars later suits for same injury)