Minnesota Lawyer
In 2005, appellant and his wife sued respondent, a real-estate developer. The lawsuit was unsuccessful. In 2009, appellant brought another lawsuit against respondent, its general partner, an affiliated company, and the attorneys who represented it in the first lawsuit. The District Court dismissed the second lawsuit on the grounds of collateral estoppel and res judicata and imposed sanctions on appellant. The Court of Appeals held that both doctrines applied. Affirmed; motion denied.
A10-1926; A10-2021 Carlson v. Bloomington Hous. Partners II (Hennepin County)
