ROBINSON v. GREATER LAKES RECOVERY CENTER (2021)

MEMORANDUM **

Barbara A. Stuart Robinson appeals pro se from the district court's summary judgment in her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal and state law claims related to her involuntary detention and treatment at defendant Greater Lakes Recovery Center (“Greater Lakes”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. City of Martinez v. Texaco Trading & Transp., Inc., 353 F.3d 758, 761 (9th Cir. 2003). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment for Greater Lakes on the basis of res judicata because Robinson raised, or could have raised, her claims in her prior Washington state court action, which involved the same parties and resulted in a final judgment on the merits. See Holcombe v. Hosmer, 477 F.3d 1094, 1097 (9th Cir. 2007) (federal court must apply state law regarding res judicata to a prior state court judgment); Ofuasia v. Smurr, 198 Wash.App. 133, 392 P.3d 1148, 1154 (2017) (setting forth elements of res judicata under Washington law); Karlberg v. Otten, 167 Wash.App. 522, 280 P.3d 1123, 1130 (2012) (“[R]es judicata prohibits the relitigation of claims and issues that were litigated, or could have been litigated, in a prior action[.]”).

AFFIRMED.