Claim and Issue Preclusion

Question 1

Basic Idea

Answer 1

• where a judgment already entered (Case 1) precludes litigation of any matters in another case (Case 2)

Question 2

Choice of Law

Answer 2

• if Case 1 and Case 2 are in different judicial systems (ex: state and fed courts or courts in different US states), the court in Case 2 applies the preclusion law of the judicial system that decided Case 1

Question 3

Claim and Issue Preclusion - Exam Tip

Answer 3

• unless q says otherwise, start analysis w/ claim preclusion
  -> if it applies, Case 2 dismissed
• if issue preclusion applies, it streamlines litigation in Case 2 by deeming an issue established in the case + thus that issue won’t be relitigated

Question 4

Claim Preclusion - Overview

Answer 4

• aka res judicata
• claimant can only sue once to vindicate a claim -> only get one case in which to seek recovery for all rights to relief for that claim

Question 5

Requirements for Claim Preclusion

Answer 5

1 - same claimant suing the same defendant
2 - valid, final judgment on the merits in case 1
3 - case 1 and case 2 must be the “same claim”

Question 6

Claim Preclusion - Valid Final Judgment on the Merits

Answer 6

• unless court said judgment “without prejudice” when entered, any judgment is “on the merits” UNLESS was based on:
  -> lack of jurisdiction (both personal and subject matter)
  -> improper venue OR
  -> failure to join an indispensable party
• true even if there was no adjudication in Case 1

Question 7

Claim Preclusion - “Same Claim” Requirement

Answer 7

• majority view: claim = any right to relief arising from a transaction or occurrence
• minority view: “primary rights doctrine” -> separate claims for property damage + personal injury that arise from a single event

Question 8

Issue Preclusion

Answer 8

• aka collateral estoppel
• narrower than claim preclusion
• issue litigated in Case 1 + same issue presented in Case 2 -> if issue preclusion applies, this same issue can’t be relitigated in Case 2

Question 10

Requirements for Issue Preclusion

Answer 10

• case 1 ended in valid, final judgment on the merits
• same issue was actually litigated + determined in Case 1
• issue was essential to judgment in Case 1
• can only be used against someone who was a party to Case 1 or in privity with a party
• question of by whom issue preclusion can be used (always able to use if you were a party)

Question 11

Issue Preclusion - Essential to the Judgment

Answer 11

• means that the finding on the issue is the basis for the judgment

Question 12

Issue Preclusion - Privity

Answer 12

• a party to Case 1 must have represented someone who was not a party 1 Case 1
• ex: a class action binds all class members even though they weren’t all parties to the action

Question 13

Nonmutual Defensive Issue Preclusion

Answer 13

• person using preclusion was not a party to Case 1 and is the defendant in Case 2

Question 14

Nonmutual Offensive Issue Preclusion

Answer 14

• person using preclusion was not a party to Case 1 and is the plaintiff in Case 2

Question 15

Nonmutual Offensive Issue Preclusion - Fairness Factors

Answer 15

Courts will consider whether:
- party to be bound had a full + fair opportunity to litigate in Case 1
- party to be bound had a strong incentive to litigate in Case 1 (ex: small sum vs larger one)
- party asserting issue preclusion could have easily joined to Case 1 (might not let you use the judgment if you could’ve easily joined) AND
- there have been no inconsistent findings on the issue (if there have been inconsistent findings, wouldn’t be fair to let you use the ones that work for you)

Question 16

Four Factors for Offensive Issue Preclusion

Answer 16

• are the issues identical?
• is there a final judgment on the merits?
• did the party against whom the judgment is to be used have a fair opportunity to be heard?
• is it not unfair or inequitable to apply issue preclusion?