11. Preclusion

Question 1

What is claim preclusion (res judicata) and what are the elements?

Answer 1

Claim preclusion bars parties from relitigating claims that they fully litigated in a previous case. This doctrine values fairness, protecting perception of judicial system, and efficiency.

1. Same claim
2. Same parties
3. Judgement on the merits

Question 2

How do you determine if the second case has the same claim as a previous case?

Answer 2

Transactional Test (federal court uses this test) holds that purely factual, separate claims will be considered the same cause of action for purpose of res judicata if they arise from a single group of operative facts, regardless of whether they assert different theories of relief. The facts in both suits are related by time, space, origin, and motivation.

Same Evidence Test holds that a second suit is barred if the evidence needed to sustain the second suit would have sustained the first, or if the same facts were essential to maintain both actions.

Question 3

What is a final judgement on the merits?

Answer 3

Judgement is final when it ends the litigation at the trial court level, does not matter if there is a pending appeal.

The following are still final judgements on the merits: summary judgement, a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, and default judgment.

Dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction and settlements are not final judgements on the merits.

Question 4

What is issue preclusion (collateral estoppel) and what are the elements?

Answer 4

Issue preclusion bars a litigant from relitigating an issue that was already decided in an earlier case.

1. Same Issue
2. Actually litigated in first suit
3. Actually decided in first suit
4. Essential to the judgement in the first suit
5. Same parties

Question 5

Hypo: Ann is prosecuted and acquitted of a criminal assault and battery. Later, Ann is sued for civil assault and battery on the same facts. Are they the same issues?

Answer 5

The issues in suits 1 and 2 are not the same because in a criminal case beyond a reasonable doubt must be met which is a higher burden of proof then what needs to be met for a civil case.

Question 6

Hypo: Ann is sued for civil assault and battery which is dismissed for a 12(b)(6). Later, Ann is prosecuted for a criminal assault and battery. Are they the same issues?

Answer 6

The issues in suits 1 and 2 are not the same because the burden of proof for a civil case is lower than that for a criminal case.

Question 7

Hypo: Ann is prosecuted and convicted of a criminal assault and battery. Later, Ann is sued for civil assault and battery on the same facts. Are they the same issues?

Answer 7

The issues in suits 1 and 2 are the same because the criminal suit has a higher burden of proof that was met therefore the burden of proof for a civil case would have been met.

Question 8

How do you know if the issue is essential to the judgement in the first suit?

Answer 8

Second restatement of judgements states that where a judgement is based upon alternative, independent grounds, neither ground is considered essential to the judgement but when it is appealed and the appellate court upholds both grounds then both are essential and precluded from prelitigation. And if they uphold one then only the one cannot be relitigated.

Question 9

What is the exception to the same parties element?

Answer 9

Nonmutual collateral estoppel cannot be applied defensively/offensively against a new party because each party has 1 opportunity to prove their case, everyone gets their day in court.