
USCA1 Opinion

	




                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 96-2193                                   SHAUN HATHAWAY,                                Plaintiff, Appellant,                                          v.                                  CITY OF CLAREMONT,                                 Defendant, Appellee.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE                   [Hon. Joseph A. DiClerico, U.S. District Judge]                                              ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                Torruella, Chief Judge,                                           ___________                           Campbell, Senior Circuit Judge,                                     ____________________                              and Boudin, Circuit Judge.                                          _____________                                 ____________________            Donald L. Lader, Jr. and Law Offices of Michael C. Shklar on            ____________________     ________________________________        brief for appellant.            Edward B. Mulligan, IV and Gallagher, Callahan & Gartrell, P.A.            ______________________     ____________________________________        on brief for appellee.                                 ____________________                                    MARCH 27, 1997                                 ____________________                 Per Curiam.  The  judgment is affirmed substantially for                 __________            the  reasons enumerated by Chief Judge DiClerico in his order            dated September 16,  1996.  Appellant has  advanced no reason            to   question  the   careful  analysis   of  claim-preclusion            principles  there set  forth.   The contention  that appellee            waived or forfeited such  defense by failing to assert  it in            timely fashion,  see, e.g., Calderon Rosado  v. General Elec.                             ___  ____  _______________     _____________            Circuit Breakers, Inc., 805 F.2d  1085, 1087 (1st Cir.  1986)            ______________________            (citing Restatement  (Second)  of Judgments    26(1)(a)),  is            raised for  the first time  on appeal.   We thus review  that            claim for "plain error" indicative of a "clear miscarriage of            justice."  Playboy Enterprises,  Inc. v. Public Serv. Comm'n,                       __________________________    ___________________            906 F.2d 25, 40 (1st Cir. 1990) (internal quotation omitted).            We see neither plain error nor a miscarriage of justice.                 Affirmed.  See Loc. R. 27.1.                 ____________________________                                         -2-
