Bordock v. Dollar General, Inc., 3:14-cv-01753

Plaintiff Laurie Bordock, pro se, sues Dollar General, Inc. for civil rights violations and defamation, seeking $1 billion in damages.
Plaintiff is homeless/traveling and resides in Oklahoma; she files in forma pauperis but process will not issue.
Court previously dismissed Bordock v. Dollar General, Inc., 3:13-cv-00043, with prejudice for failure to state a claim; Sixth Circuit later dismissed for want of prosecution.
Court holds res judicata bars the federal civil rights claims based on the prior final judgment on the same cause of action.
Plaintiff’s new complaint alleges trespass/trespass citation at Oklahoma Dollar General stores and defamation arising therefrom.
Court declines supplemental jurisdiction after dismissing federal claims and dismisses the remaining state defamation claim without prejudice to be filed in Oklahoma state court.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether federal claims are barred by res judicata	Bordock's new complaint restates prior allegations	Claims were previously adjudicated and final	Yes; claims barred, dismissed with prejudice
Whether the defamation claim may be heard in federal court	Defamation occurred in Oklahoma and should be redressed	State tort claim not within original federal jurisdiction	No; dismissal without prejudice for lack of federal jurisdiction; can be filed in Oklahoma state court

J.Z.G. Res., Inc. v. Shelby Ins. Co., 84 F.3d 211 (6th Cir. 1996) (defines res judicata; bars claims based on same cause of action)
Montana v. United States, 440 U.S. 147 (U.S. 1979) (determines issue preclusion and conclusive results in later suits)
Haddad v. Mich. Nat’l Corp., 34 F.App’x 217 (6th Cir. 2002) (final judgment on merits supports res judicata)
Matter of W. Tex. Mktg. Corp., 12 F.3d 487 (5th Cir. 1994) (final judgment on merits for res judicata)