Niki-Alexander Shetty v. Wells Fargo Bank, Na
696 F. App'x 828
9th Cir.2017Background
- Plaintiff Niki-Alexander Shetty (aka Satish Shetty) brought federal and state claims arising from a foreclosure and third-party borrower refinance loans.
- The district court dismissed Shetty’s action on the basis of res judicata, concluding prior litigation between the parties or their privies produced final judgments on the merits that barred the new suit.
- The district court took judicial notice of related federal and state court proceedings; Shetty challenged that and other evidentiary rulings.
- Shetty moved for default judgment against GF Mortgage, Inc.; the district court denied the motion and Shetty appealed that denial.
- Shetty asserted the court failed to rule on a motion to strike and that appellees’ counsel lacked authorization to appear; the court rejected both contentions on appeal.
- The Ninth Circuit granted in part appellees’ request for judicial notice (limiting one exhibit to the fact of its filing in a Southern District of New York case) and affirmed the district court’s dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether res judicata bars Shetty’s claims | Shetty contended his claims were not precluded | Appellees argued claims were raised or could have been raised in prior actions that resulted in final judgments | Affirmed: res judicata bars the action because prior suits by parties or their privies produced final judgments on the merits |
| Whether the district court properly took judicial notice of court proceedings | Shetty argued taking notice was improper | Appellees maintained the court may notice related court filings | Affirmed: court did not abuse discretion in taking judicial notice of related proceedings |
| Whether denial of default judgment against GF Mortgage, Inc. was an abuse of discretion | Shetty sought default judgment | Appellees opposed default judgment and cited relevant factors against entry | Affirmed: denial was within district court’s discretion |
| Whether the district court failed to rule on motion to strike or counsel lacked authorization | Shetty claimed no ruling and unauthorized counsel appearance | Appellees denied those assertions and pointed to record | Rejected: Shetty’s assertions unsupported; claims meritless |
Key Cases Cited
- Stewart v. U.S. Bancorp, 297 F.3d 953 (9th Cir.) (res judicata elements and review of claim preclusion)
- Tahoe Sierra Pres. Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Reg'l Planning Agency, 322 F.3d 1064 (9th Cir.) (privity and substantial identity between parties)
- United States v. Woods, 335 F.3d 993 (9th Cir.) (standard for appellate review of judicial notice)
- U.S. ex rel. Robinson Rancheria Citizens Council v. Borneo, Inc., 971 F.2d 244 (9th Cir.) (courts may take notice of proceedings in other courts when directly related)
- NewGen, LLC v. Safe Cig, LLC, 840 F.3d 606 (9th Cir.) (factors and standard for entering default judgment)