930 F. 2d 920 - Gudjonsson v. F/v Coastal Glacier (F/v Pacesetter) Pacesetter Marine Inc
930 F2d 920 Gudjonsson v. F/v Coastal Glacier (F/v Pacesetter) Pacesetter Marine Inc
930 F.2d 920
Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
Gunnar GUDJONSSON, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
The F/V COASTAL GLACIER (F/V PACESETTER), official number
576 391, her engines, tackle, appurtenances, etc.,
Defendant-Appellee.
PACESETTER MARINE, INC., a Washington corporation,
Third-Party-Plaintiff-Appellee,
and
Harbor Enterprises, Inc., an Alaska corporation,
Third-Party-Intervenor-Appellee,
v.
Helga GUDJONSSON, individually and the marital community of
Gunnar and Helga Gudjonsson,
Third-Party-Defendants-Appellants.
Nos. 89-35459, 89-35742 and 89-35834.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted Nov. 8, 1990.
Submission Vacated and Deferred Nov. 19, 1990.
Resubmitted April 16, 1991.
Decided April 16, 1991.
Before TANG, O'SCANNLAIN and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
Advertisement
These appeals arise out of the district court's entry of summary judgment in favor of the appellees. The district court based its ruling on a prior state court judgment then on appeal to the Supreme Court of Washington, and held that res judicata precluded the Gudjonssons from relitigating in federal court those claims they raised or could have raised in their underlying state court action.
On January 24, 1991, the Supreme Court of Washington reversed the state trial court, holding that its judgment had been void ab initio, and issued its mandate in that case on March 6, 1991. See Harbor Enters., et al. v. Gudjonsson, et al., No. 56078-1. It now appearing that there is no longer any state court judgment which could give rise to any preclusive effect to the instant federal action,
It is ORDERED that these causes be deemed submitted; and
It is further ORDERED that the judgment of the district court be vacated and the cases remanded for further proceedings; and
It is further ORDERED that the sanction judgment of the district court for supposed relitigation of claims is reversed.
Each side will bear its own costs of this appeal.