786 F. Supp. 2d 395
D.D.C.2011Background
- Mwabira-Simer a and Mutonyi sue Sodexho, its employees, and Howard University for discrimination and tort claims in the District of Columbia.
- This is Mwabira-Simera's fourth suit; a prior arbitration and settlement (March 15, 2004) released Sodexho and its employees from claims Mwabira could have brought.
- Following the settlement, Mwabira filed two largely duplicative lawsuits which were dismissed as barred by the settlement and later case dispositions involved Howard University.
- The court addresses res judicata and distinguishing claims pre- versus post-August 2004; pre-August 2004 claims are barred, while new allegations post-August 2004 may proceed.
- Mutonyi proceeded pro se but did not obtain leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and is not entitled to prepayment waiver.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are pre-August 2004 claims barred by res judicata? | Mwabira argues claims should be allowed given ongoing conduct. | Sodexho argues prior settlement and final judgments bar relitigation. | Yes; pre-August 2004 claims are dismissed as barred by res judicata. |
| Do post-August 2004 allegations survive the res judicata bar? | New allegations arose after the prior suits and could not have been raised earlier. | Post-August 2004 claims are not barred and may proceed. | Yes; claims arising after August 2004 may proceed; defendants must answer by June 24, 2011. |
| Is Mutonyi entitled to proceed in forma pauperis? | Mutonyi seeks to proceed without prepayment of fees. | Mutonyi did not obtain leave to proceed in forma pauperis. | Mutonyi not entitled to proceed without prepayment. |
Key Cases Cited
- Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90 (U.S. Supreme Court 1980) (final judgment on the merits precludes relitigation of same grounds)
- Apotex, Inc. v. FDA, 393 F.3d 210 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (broad scope of res judicata applies to related claims)
- Page v. United States, 729 F.2d 818 (D.C. Cir. 1984) (cause of action includes all rights to remedies from the transaction)
- Stanton v. D.C. Court of Appeals, 127 F.3d 72 (D.C. Cir. 1997) (final, valid judgment on the merits precludes further litigation between same parties on same causes)