How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Tina Your Own Question
Tina, Lawyer
Category: Legal
Satisfied Customers: 8775
Experience:  JD, BBA Over 25 years legal and business experience.
Type Your Legal Question Here...
Tina is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

please forward to Lucy she has been extremely helpful !! Thanks In

Customer Question

please forward to Lucy she has been extremely helpful !! Thanks

InXXXXXfound a previous lawsuit I filed no god for the below reason

:this court finds that plaintiff surveillance allegations are indeed delusional any claims based on the surveillance allegation is absolutely devoid of merit is wholly insubstantial and frivolous and dismissed

In 2011 I filed a like claim- I beat the defense motion on Res judicata and claims preclusion
The defendants filed a 12 b (6) (1) dismissal, I then filed an amended complaint correcting the jurisdictional claims and filed as exhibit SF95 affidavits pursuant to criminal penalty of Title 18 100 and 287 outlining those injured that were like in nature in the amended complaint the Court dismissed using the 2009 decision without allowing my amended to be filed as required before a harsh result can be issued ?MY ? is if the court on these allegations dismissed the defense motion for res Judicata and claims preclusion is the court allowed to use the very reasoning they disallowed the defense ?, I am referring to the First two line marked 1. On this page. if the court is barred due to a res Judicata itself can you help find some cites ? I have . found one possible a thought would be appreciate if this cite could work

It is important to note that the court did not dismiss the case prior to trial on the basis of the threshold issue of res judicata; rather, it held a full-blown trial on the merits of Jones' underlying claims of due process violations in his disciplinary proceedings. Nor does the district court indicate that it regarded Jones' arguments on the res judicata and due process issues to be legally barren or factually insubstantial434 U.S. at 421-22, 98 S.Ct. at 700.
If this does not work any cite that would repel the court decision on line 1
Submitted: 4 years ago.
Category: Legal
Expert:  Lucy, Esq. replied 4 years ago.
Good morning,

I'm sorry, but I'm not able to do in-depth case law research. I'll open this up to the other experts to see if someone can help.