Appeals & Preclusion Flashcards
What are the requirements for claim preclusion (res judicata)?
(1) Valid final judgment on the merits
- Made in consideration of substantive (not technical) grounds of claim or defense
- Leaves nothing for court to do but enforce judgment
(2) Identical claims
- Claims arose from the same T/O, or series thereof
- Both claims could have been raised in the first action
(3) Identical Parties
- involves same parties or those in privity
- Parties occupy same role in both actions
**But when the same parties occupy different roles, claim preclusion will still apply if a party violated the first court’s compulsory-counterclaim rule.**
When does claim preclusion apply?
Claim preclusion applies if the parties occupy the same roles in the first and subsequent actions—ie, the parties are identical.
If the parties are not identical, claim preclusion will still apply if a party violated the first court’s compulsory-counterclaim rule.
What is the effect of preclusion in regards to the Full Faith and Credit Clause?
Effect of preclusion: The Full Faith and Credit Clause requires that judgments from state courts be given the same effect in any other court that they would be given in the state in which they were handed down.
When determining the preclusive effect of a prior judgment, look to the law of the court that decided it. So, if a judgment would be held to have a nonpreclusive effect in the state it was handed down in, then it cannot have a preclusive effect in any other court.
What are the requirements for collateral estoppel (issue preclusion)?
(1) Same Issue
- issues must be exactly the same
(2) Actually litigated
- The issues need to be actually raised and litigated
(3) Actually decided
- The issues need to be actually decided in trial
(4) Necessary
- The decision must be necessary to the court’s judgment
What is nonmutual collateral estoppel?
Nonmutual collateral estoppel allows a party to invoke collateral estoppel against a party who litigated and lost on an issue in a prior action.
What is defensive nonmutual collateral estoppel?
Defensive nonmutual estoppel means issue preclusion may be raised as a shield by a new defendant. Some states do not allow offensive nonmutual collateral estoppel where it can be used as a sword by a new plaintiff (but federal law allows this).
What is offensive nonmutual collateral estoppel?
Some states do not allow offensive nonmutual collateral estoppel where it can be used as a sword by a new plaintiff (but federal law allows this).
Can a party immediately appeal a final judgment of an action that involves multiple claims or parties?
NO. unless the court expressly determines that there is no just reason for delay and enters a final judgment.
Absent limited exceptions, a party may appeal only after the district court has entered a final judgment.
However, when an action involves multiple claims or parties, a district court may enter final judgment as to fewer than all claims or parties if it expressly determinesthat there is no just reason for delay.
Unless this express determination is made, any court order that disposes of those claims or parties is not immediately appealable and may be revised before final judgment is entered on all claims or parties.
If the court expressly determines that there isnot just reason for delay, a party may appeal that judgment if the notice of appeal is filed with the district court clerk within 30 days after entry of that judgment.*
- *The time to file the notice of appeal is extended to 60 days if one of the parties is the United States, a federal agency, or a federal officer or employee sued in an official capacity
What is the time to file a petition to appeal an order granting or denying class certification if one of the parties is the U.S., a federal agency, or a federal officer or employee sued in an official capacity?
*The time to file a petition to appeal an order granting or denying certification is extended to 45 days if one of the parties is the United States, a federal agency, or a federal officer or employee sued in an official capacity.
Interlocatory appeals statute exception
The final-judgment rule generally precludes federal appellate courts from hearing an appeal until the federal district court has entered a final judgment.
But the interlocutory appeals statute (28 U.S.C. § 1292) provides exceptions to this rule that allow certain equitable orders to be immediately appealed as a matter of right.
These include:
i) orders granting, modifying, refusing, or dissolving injunctions
ii) orders appointing or refusing to appoint receivers AND
iii) decrees determining the rights and liabilities of the parties to admiralty cases in which appeals from final decrees are allowed.
Issue Preclusion
Collateral Estoppel
Issue preclusion (i.e., collateral estoppel) bars the relitigation of issues that were actually litigated, determined, and essential to a valid final judgment—e.g., when the court grants summary judgment.
There are two types of issue preclusion:
1) Mutual – when issue preclusion in the second action is asserted by parties to the first action against other parties to the first action
2) Nonmutual – when issue preclusion in the second action is asserted by nonparties to the first action against parties to the first action
Both types of issue preclusion can be asserted against parties to the first action or their privies, absent limited exceptions.
However, they cannot be asserted against a nonparty to the first action because it would deprive that party of the opportunity to fully and fairly litigate his/her claims and defenses.
What happens to the district court proceedings if the appellate court permits the appeal of a grant or denial of class certification?
If the appellate court permits the appeal, the district court proceedings are stayed pending the appeal only when ordered by the district court or the appellate court.
Example of “successors-in-interest (i.e., privity of estate with) parties to the prior action for purposes of claim preclusion.
- Suit #1
* Property owner v. Neighbor (valid final judgment on the merits regarding recognition of easement)
Property Owner sells to Buyer / Neighbor dies ownership passes to Son
- Suit #2
* Buyer v. Son (same action for recognition of alleged easement)
* Son can raise valid Claim Preclusion defense because both the son and the buyer were successors-in-interest of (i.e., in privity of estate with) the parties to the prior action, the son can assert that the prior valid, final judgment on the merits precludes the buyer from maintaining the current lawsuit.*
