Claim and Issue Preclusion

Question 1

Define claim

Answer 1

A claim refers to a group of facts limited to a single occurrence or transaction without particular reference to a resulting legal right.

Question 2

What are the elements for Claim Preclusion that must be in your rule statement?

Answer 2

1. There must have been a final and valid judgment on the merits
2. The claims in the first suit must be the same in the second suit or that it arises out of the same T/O
3. The parties in the first suit are the same as the parties in the second suit, or are in privity

Question 3

In which element of claim preclusion will reasonable minds differ?

Answer 3

If the claims arise out of the same transaction or occurrence

Question 4

What are the 3 exceptions to claim preclusion?

Answer 4

1. judgment obtained by fraud
2. court was without subject matter jurisdiction
3. divisible k

Question 5

Define divisible as it relates to contracts

Answer 5

If a K is divisible, there can be a cause of action for each division of the K

Question 6

Define indivisible as it related to contracts

Answer 6

If a K is indivisible, there cannot be a cause of action for each division of the K

Question 7

Define issue preclusion

Answer 7

Issue preclusion is when a party is precluded from relitigating issues that were actually and necessarily decided in prior action

Question 8

What are the elements of issue preclusion that must be in your rule statements?

Answer 8

1. There must be a final and valid judgement on the merits
2. The issue in the second case must be the same as the issue in the first
3. At least one of parties in the second case must be the same as the first
4. The issue must have been actually litigated and necessarily decided

Question 9

Give an example of defensive issue preclusion

Answer 9

A P has sued a D and lost. That same P is now going to raise an issue against a 2nd D. The D will say you already litigated that issue.

Question 10

Give an example of offensive issue preclusion

“wait and see”

Answer 10

A P sued a D. The P wins. A second P brings a claim against the same D and this second P will try to use the ruling in the previous claim to their advantage. The court does not like this because this is not efficient.

Question 11

Why would a party want to have a general verdict?

Answer 11

A party may want to have a general verdict to allow something to be litigated a 2nd when they believe they will be more successful.