PRECLUSION

Question 1

BASIC IDEA

Answer 1

The preclusive effect of a prior judgment on the merits
Whether a judgment already entered in case 1 precludes litigation of any matters in another case
- if case 1 and case 2 are in DIFFERENT judicial systems, case 2 applies the preclusion law of the system that decided case 1

Question 2

CLAIM PRECLUSION (RES JUDICATA)

Answer 2

• can only sue on one claim once
  Requirements:
  1. case 1 and case 2 were brought by the same claimant against the same defendant
  2. case 1 ended in a valid final judgment on the MERITS (any judgment is on the merits unless: the court says otherwise OR the judgment was based on jurisdiction, venue, or indispensable parties)
  3. Case 1 and case 2 asserted the “same claim”
• majority view: a claim is any right to relief arising from a transaction or occurrence
• minority view: there are separate claims for property damage and for personal injury because those are primary rights- different transaction or occurrence if the claim is for property rights and then personal injury and vise versa

Question 3

ISSUE PRECLUSION (COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL)

Answer 3

Issue litigated in case 1 and the SAME issue is presented in case 2
Requirements:
1. valid final judgment on the merits of case 1
2. issue was actually litigated and determined in case 1 3. issue is essential to the judgment in case 1
4. issue preclusion can only be asserted AGAINST party to case 1 or who was represented by someone who was a party to case 1
5. issue preclusion can only be asserted BY someone who was a party to case 1.

Question 4

NONMUTUAL ISSUE PRECLUSION

Answer 4

If someone who was not a party to case 1 uses issue preclusion- two types:

1. nonmutual defensive issue preclusion: user was not a party to case 1 and is DEFENDANT in case 2–> this will be ok as long asnother party had a FULL chance to litigate the issue in case 1
2. nonmutual offensive issue preclusion: User was not a party in case 1 and is PLAINTIFF in case 2–> it is ok if it is fair based on:
   - D had full and fair opportunity to litigate in case 1
   - D had an incentive to litigate strongly in case 1
   - person bringing the nonmututal offensive issue preclusion could NOT have easily joined case 1
   - no consistent findings on this issue

Question 5

CLAIM AND ISSUE PRECLUSION IN SPECIAL SITUATIONS

Answer 5

1. Judgments for specific performance- apply However, merger foes not apply because such a judgment cannot be enforced by bringing a suit on the judgment
2. In rem judgments: court exercises in rem over some property or status within its control and proper notice given to all interested parties- judgment is binding on all persons
3. Quasi in rem jurisdictions: no personal judgment is granted against anyone and no other property is affected because quasi in rem determines rights on specific property.