¶1 Michael Jacobson appeals the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Having carefully reviewed the record, we agree with the district court that Jacobson’s claims are barred under Nebraska law because he seeks to bring the same claims he brought, or could have brought, in his prior state-court action. See Misischia v. St. John’s Mercy Health Sys., 457 F.3d 800, 804 (8th Cir.2006) (preclusive effect of prior state-court judgment is governed by law of state in which judgment was rendered), petition for cert. filed, (U.S. Nov. 2, 2006) (No. 06-623); Carter v. Kansas City S. Ry. Co., 456 F.3d 841, 848 (8th Cir.2006) (de novo review); Eicher v. Mid America Fin. Inv. Corp., 270 Neb. 370, 702 N.W.2d 792, 809 (2005) (elements of res judicata). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
¶2 . The Honorable F.A. Gossett, III, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Nebraska, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).