Joseph R. Warner v. Barbara J. Warner

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 24-2532
___________________________
Joseph R. Warner
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant
v.
Barbara J. Warner
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of Nebraska - Omaha
____________
Submitted: January 22, 2025
Filed: January 27, 2025
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, KELLY, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.

-- 1 of 2 --

Joseph Warner appeals the district court’s1 dismissal of his diversity action
based on res judicata. Upon careful de novo review, see Laase v. Cnty. of Isanti, 638
F.3d 853, 856 (8th Cir. 2011) (standard of review), we affirm.
We agree with the district court that Warner’s action was barred by res judicata,
as he raised the same claims he had raised in a prior action under a different theory
of recovery. See Fetherkile v. Fetherkile, 907 N.W.2d 275, 286 (Neb. 2018)
(Nebraska claim preclusion requirements); Hill v. AMMC, Inc., 915 N.W.2d 29, 35
(Neb. 2018) (time-bar dismissal is judgment on the merits); see also Poe v. John
Deere Co., 695 F.2d 1103, 1105 (8th Cir. 1982) (litigant cannot attempt to relitigate
the same claim under a different theory of recovery).
Accordingly, the dismissal is affirmed, see 8th Cir. R. 47B, and Warner’s
motion for summary reversal is denied.
______________________________
1The Honorable Robert F. Rossiter, Jr., Chief Judge, United States District
Court for the District of Nebraska.
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --