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 is closely related to the concept of claim preclusion, which prevents parties relitigating the same cause of action after it has been decided by a judge or jury. Res judicata (literally - that which has been decided) can be used as the term for both concepts, or purely as a synonym for claim preclusion. Under the doctrine of ...
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 ...
As it turned out, however, courts also took the position that when property owners complied with this rule and sued "first" in state court, the state court decision would give rise to res judicata or issue preclusion, so the owner's claim of federal constitutional violation could never be heard in federal court under federal law.
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 trial judge then dismissed the complaint, writing that California's 2-year statute of limitations made the claim "barred". [2] Semtek International had also filed a claim in Maryland's state court. The court here also dismissed the complaint, but on the grounds that "the res judicata effect" precludes this separate claim in a different ...
A look at where the various court cases against President-elect Donald Trump stand, and how they may — or may not — be affected by his taking the oath of office on Jan. 20.
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 Clause."