Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Angelo Gambiglioni, De re iudicata, 1579 Res judicata or res iudicata, also known as claim preclusion, is the Latin term for judged matter, [1] and refers to either of two concepts in common law civil procedure: a case in which there has been a final judgment and that is no longer subject to appeal; and the legal doctrine meant to bar (or preclude) relitigation of a claim between the same parties.
Collateral estoppel (CE), known in modern terminology as issue preclusion, is a common law estoppel doctrine that prevents a person from relitigating an issue. One summary is that, "once a court has decided an issue of fact or law necessary to its judgment, that decision ... preclude[s] relitigation of the issue in a suit on a different cause of action involving a party to the first case". [1]
In a unanimous decision penned by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the Court's central line of reasoning was whether "claim preclusion applies to defenses raised in a later suit" as detailed in the Court's opinion, and determining whether defense preclusion falls within the lines of res judicata. Highlighting that res judicata involves both issue ...
For instance, a federal court could stay state court proceedings where the federal court had previously seized the piece of property (also called a res) that was the subject of the litigation, [15] or where a litigant who lost a federal case sought to relitigate a precluded claim or issue in state court (also known as the Relitigation Exception ...
The goal of direct estoppel is to prevent a party from litigating the same cause of action or motion without having new legal or factual issues. [8] Direct estoppel is a judicial procedure instrument that "provide[s] a minimum level of preclusion below which the federal procedural system may not fall without running afoul of the Reexamination ...
Functus officio is thus bound up with the doctrine of res judicata, which prevents (in the absence of statutory authority) the re-opening of a matter before the same court, tribunal or other statutory actor that rendered the final decision. There are many exceptions; for instance, where a statute authorizes variations of the original decision ...
Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!
Under federal law, "concepts summarized by the term privity are looked to as a means of determining whether the interests of the party against whom claim preclusion is asserted were represented in prior litigation." [2] Therefore, privity in federal common law is "a convenient means of expressing conclusions that are supported by independent ...