GLATZER v. ENRON CORP

The motion court correctly held that the U.S. District court order of June 10, 1998 collaterally estops plaintiff from asserting that the idea he claims that defendants misappropriated was novel, and precludes all of plaintiff's causes of action herein. The stipulated withdrawal of plaintiff's appeal to the Second Circuit left the District Court's order intact. There is no merit to plaintiff's argument that his attorney's alleged ineptitude deprived him of a full and fair opportunity to litigate the motion underlying the Federal court order. On the contrary, the record indicates that the attorney vigorously litigated plaintiff's claims. In view of the foregoing, plaintiff's remaining points are moot.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.