ANGELA BACHMAN, Personal Representative of the Estate of Jeffrey Bachman v. Toyota Motor Corporation

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-1402
ANGELA BACHMAN, Personal Representative of the Estate of
Jeffrey Bachman,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION; TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, U.S.A.,
INCORPORATED, a California Corporation,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. Catherine C. Eagles,
District Judge. (1:10-cv-00263-CCE-PTS)
Submitted: October 20, 2011 Decided: November 21, 2011
Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael W. Patrick, LAW OFFICE OF MICHAEL W. PATRICK, Chapel
Hill, North Carolina, for Appellant. Joel H. Smith, Shawn B.
Deery, BOWMAN AND BROOKE LLP, Columbia, South Carolina; Leslie
Lane Mize, NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH, LLP, Raleigh,
North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Angela Bachman (“Bachman”), as personal representative
of the estate of Jeffrey Bachman, appeals the district court’s
order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
dismissing her civil complaint. The district court dismissed
the action on the grounds that it was barred by res judicata
because of Bachman’s earlier California action. See Jaffe v.
Accredited Surety & Cas. Co., 294 F.3d 584, 590-91 (4th Cir.
2002) (regarding full faith and credit given to prior state
court actions in any later federal suit). We review de novo a
district court’s grant of a motion to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ.
P. 12(b)(6), see Philips v. Pitt Cnty. Mem’l Hosp., 572 F.3d
176, 179-80 (4th Cir. 2009), and our review of the record
reveals no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. Bachman v. Toyota Motor
Corp., No. 1:10-cv-00263-CCE-PTS (M.D.N.C. Apr. 14, 2011). We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

-- 2 of 2 --