
USCA1 Opinion

	




          May 9, 1995                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 95-1035                                   CHUKWU E. AZUBUKO,                                Plaintiff, Appellant,                                          v.                     BOARD OF TRUSTEES, FRAMINGHAM STATE COLLEGE,                                 Defendant, Appellee.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS                     [Hon. Joseph L. Tauro, U.S. District Judge]                                            ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                Torruella, Chief Judge,                                           ___________                          Selya and Boudin, Circuit Judges.                                            ______________                                 ____________________            Chukwu E. Azubuko on brief pro se.            _________________            Scott Harshbarger,  Attorney General,  and Amy Spector,  Assistant            _________________                          ___________        Attorney General, on brief for appellee.                                 ____________________                                 ____________________                      Per Curiam.  We have carefully reviewed the  briefs                      __________            of the parties and the record in this case and agree with the            district  court's conclusion that  appellant's federal action            is  barred  by  res  judicata.    See  Mulrain  v.  Board  of                                              ___  _______      _________            Selectmen, 944 F.2d  23, 25-26 (1st  Cir. 1991) (per  curiam)            _________            (where  a federal lawsuit concerns the same events as a prior            state lawsuit, a final judgment in the state  action prevents            the plaintiff from  pursuing the federal  action).  See  also                                                                ___  ____            Isaac v.  Schwartz, 706  F.2d 15,  17 (1st  Cir.  1983).   We            _____     ________            therefore affirm the judgment  of the district court for  the                      ______            reasons stated in its Memorandum dated November 10, 1994.
