Did the district court err in applying res judicata to appellants claims of discrimination, unfair trade practices, and improper contract rescission?
2. Did the district court err by granting a motion for summary judgment against appellant’s claims of fraud and racketeering? 3. Did the district court err by granting an injunction prohibiting appellant from bringing further claims against respondent? ANALYSIS 1. Did the district court err in applying res judicata to appellant’s claims of discrimination, unfair trade practices, and improper contract rescission? We review de novo whether the doctrine of res judicata applies to a given set of facts. Erickson v. Commissioner of Dep’t of Human Servs., 494 N.W.2d 58, 61 (Minn. App. 1992). If the doctrine does apply, then the decision to apply it is left to the trial court’s discretion. Id. The three elements for res judicata are: (1) identical parties; (2) a final judgment on the merits; and (3) a second suit involving the same cause of action. Meyers v. Price, 463 N.W.2d 773, 776 (Minn. App. 1990), [*7] review denied (Minn. Feb. 4, 1991). We find that the district court properly found all
