[NOT FOR PUBLICATION–NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]
United States Court of Appeals
For the First Circuit
No. 00-2132
KEVIN RONDEAU,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, ET AL.,
Defendants, Appellees.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
[Hon. Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr., U.S. District Judge]
Before
Boudin, Chief Judge,
Selya and Lynch, Circuit Judges.
Kevin R. Rondeau on brief pro se.
Charles P. Bauer and Ransmeier & Spellman Professional
Corporation on brief for appellees.
August 2, 2001
Per Curiam. Appellant, Kevin Rondeau, appeals the district
court's dismissal of his complaint on the ground of res
judicata. We give plenary review to a ruling based on res
judicata. Porn v. National Grange Mut. Ins. Co., 93 F.3d 31, 33
(1st Cir. 1996). We have carefully reviewed the parties' briefs
and the record on appeal. Upon our independent review, we
affirm, essentially for the reasons stated in the district
court's orders, dated July 18, 2000, and September 13, 2000.
In addition, there was neither error of law nor abuse of
discretion in the district court's refusal to recuse itself or
to retransfer this case to the United States District Court for
the Southern District of Ohio. Rondeau also complains that the
district court refused to permit him to represent his minor
child or, in the alternative, to appoint counsel for her. But,
there was no prejudice as a result of the court's decision.
Rondeau had previously filed an identical complaint in 1998 and
he was permitted to litigate in that case on behalf of himself
and on behalf of his minor child. We affirmed the dismissal of
that complaint in Rondeau v. State of New Hampshire, No. 98-
1802, (1st Cir. Feb. 26, 1999) (unpublished per curiam).
Because the instant case was properly dismissed on the basis of
res judicata -- a basis that would have remained a proper ground
-2-
for dismissal even if the district court had permitted Rondeau
to represent the interests of that minor child in this case as
well -- there was no prejudice as a result of the district
court's refusal to permit Rondeau to represent that child or to
appoint counsel for her in this case.
The motion to review the entire district court record is
granted.
Appellant's motions to strike the appellees' brief are
denied.
The judgment of the district court, dated September 14, 2000
is affirmed.
-3-