Ramirez-Fernandez v. USA
Case Date: 04/10/1992
Docket No: 91-2254
|
April 10, 1992 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION] ___________________ No. 91-2254 GERMAIN RAMIREZ-FERNANDEZ, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant, Appellee. __________________ APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE [Hon. D. Brock Hornby, U.S. District Judge] ___________________ ___________________ Before Breyer, Chief Judge ___________ Selya and Cyr, Circuit Judges. ______________ ___________________ Germain Ramirez-Fernandez, on brief pro se. _________________________ Richard S. Cohen, United States Attorney, and F. Mark _________________ ________ Terison, Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee. _______ __________________ __________________ Per Curiam. We agree with the district court that __________ appellant's present action attempting to recover damages or the jewelry which was the subject of the forfeiture action is barred by res judicata. That appellant's defenses to the forfeiture action were not actually litigated either in the forfeiture action or in appellant's subsequently unsuccessful Rule 60(b) type motion to set aside the forfeiture judgment does not avail appellant because a judgment, even if obtained by default, has res judicata effect as against all defenses which could have been raised in the action. Saud v. Bank of ____ _______ New York, 929 F.2d 916, 918-22 (2d Cir. 1991). ________ Affirmed. ________ -2- |