Two quick points about this case. First, for those profoundly interested in civil procedure (and who isn't?), it contains a neat discussion of the doctrinal prohibition on duplicative suits, which is a different doctrine than claim preclusion but intimately related in its details. So it's a quick primer on something you occasionally see but that we typically don't talk about much in law school.
Second, on the less academic front, did you know that California food and drug inspectors carry a gun?! I did not. But apparently they do. The State of California Department of Health Services decided that they did not especially want Avril Adams to be employed in that position, she sued, lost at trial, filed another suit, got it dismissed, filed an appeal, and lost again. All of which seemed right to me.
Parenthetically, given the brief glimpse into Ms. Adams's conduct contained in Judge Thompson's opinion, I'm somewhat pleased that she's not carrying a gun. Or, perhaps more accurately, one provided by the state. It sounds like she may have some "issues" -- as we say down here in SoCal -- that may well include some anger management problems. To which packing heat probably isn't an especially great solution.