Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity and Equal Protection in a disability case Whitman v. American Trucking Associations, Inc. 531 U.S. 457 (2001) determining the scope of the EPA's power to set air quality standards Semtek International Inc. v. Lockheed Martin Corp. 531 U.S. 497 (2001) res judicata effect of federal judgments in state court
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 ...
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]
United States v. Throckmorton (98 U.S. 61) is an 1878 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court on civil procedure, specifically res judicata, in cases heard at equity.A unanimous Court affirmed an appeal of a decision by the District Court for California upholding a Mexican-era land claim, holding that collateral estoppel bars untimely motions to set aside the verdict where the purportedly ...
The shortest period is 11 months, for the constitutional law Fourth Amendment (re: search and seizure) cases Robbins v. California, 453 U.S. 420 decision in July 1981, overruled by the United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798 decision in June 1982.
Under the Criminal Appeals Act of March 2, 1907, c. 2564, 34 Stat. 1246, the right to review decisions and judgments sustaining special pleas in bar is not limited to cases in which the decisions or judgments are based upon the invalidity or construction of the statutes upon which the indictments are founded.
res judicata may not bind a subsequent plaintiff who had no opportunity to be represented in the earlier civil action Helvering v. Horst: 311 U.S. 112 (1940) refinement of assignment of income doctrine: Sibbach v. Wilson & Co. 312 U.S. 1 (1941) Erie doctrine, applicability of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: Railroad Commission v. Pullman Co ...