Repose Flashcards
For claim preclusion element 1
prior suit that proceeded to a final judgment on the merits
Claim preclusion requirement 2
present suit arises out of the same claim as the prior suit
Claim preclusion requirement 3
parties in the suit the same, or in privity
No preclusion if ___
no jdx, fraud, collusion, clerical mistake, nonjoinder/misjoinder, venue
FRCP 41(b) presumptively treats dismissal for failure to comply with FRCP as __
adjudication on the merits
Whether dismissal due to SoL is on the merits ___
varies from state to state
Use ___ to determine preclusive effects of prior federal case and ___ to determine preclusive effects of prior state case
federal law, state law
Semtek holding
In diversity cases, Erie points to using state preclusion rules
Why state preclusion rules in Semtek
Hanna test shows not unavoidable collision
Two theories for same claim
transaction/primary rights
You ___ claims that should have brought
can preclude
If you have both state law and federal law claim, you must bring _____ in state court, ____ in federal if or bring ___
all, all if supplemental, multiple suits in multiple fora
23(b)(2) class that wins an injunction ____ money damages because ___
can seek, technically could not have been brought
In parallel proceedings, the _____ will preclude the others
first case with judgment
____ can be reserved from state court but must __
Federal claims, notify
Car Carriers rule
in deciding whether causes of action are identical under res judicata, court must decide if same core of facts
Car Carriers holdign
claim barred by res judicata because these are the same underlying facts regardless of different legal theory
Car Carriers reason 1
change in legal theory doesn’t create new CoA, courts right to assume P done legal homework
Car Carriers reason 2
reject primary rights test (maybe would’ve allowed)
Car Carriers reason 3
if not create incentive to be as ignorant as possible to avoid preclusion
Transaction test for preclusion requires lots of ___
pleading in the alternative
Federal rule about relief from a judgment
60
60 is about
relief from a judgment
Rule 60 does not mean a ___ and is ___
new case, up to discretion of the court
Same transaction test ____ than primary rights
precludes more
If district court declines supplemental jdx, ___
state claims not precluded
If court says no jdx, couldn’t __
bring claims even though tried (no preclusion)
B2 is preclusive in __
5th circuit
Reasons against making B2 preclusive
no notice, due process issue
First exception to idea can’t be bound by judgment not party to
agree to bound
2 exception to idea can’t be bound by judgment not party to
substantive legal relationships
3 exception to idea can’t be bound by judgment not party to
adequately represented
4` exception to idea can’t be bound by judgment not party to
person controlled the prior litigation
5 exception to idea can’t be bound by judgment not party to
person designated rep of party in prior litigatio
6 exception to idea can’t be bound by judgment not party to
bankruptcy
Taylor holding
no privity, no precluded
Taylor reason 1
general rule person not party didn’t have full and fair opp to litigate
Taylor reason 2
None of 6 exceptions apply
Taylor reason 3
virtual representation not valid, 6 not perfect but easier legal calls than if people good enough friends
Issue preclusion applies only to
issues actually litigated and resolved
Issue preclusion requires (4)
issue actually litigated, final judgment, essential to the judgment, same issue
Essential to the judgment means
essential to underlying case, not just decision at hand
When there is a general jury verdict not broken by issues there is ____
not issue preclusion
Jarocz takeaway
must be essential to overall judgment for issue preclusion
Jaroscz holding
no issue preclusion because not essential
other factors in Jaroscz
did litigate (judge looked at and considered affidavit), prior judgment, same issue
Nonmutual preclusion is when
claim/issue precluded with a nonparty to the intitial litigation
Main issue in nonmutual preclusion
due process
Parklane is about
offensive nonmutual preclusion
Parklane rule
A nonparty in prior judgment may use that judgment offensively to prevent D from relitigating issues resolved in earlier proceeding provided that (1) P couldn’t easily join in earlier action (2) use won’t be unfair to D
Parklane reason 1
TC should have discretion in deciding if offensive nonmutual preclusion okay
problems with offensive nonmutual preclusion
could create inconsistent judgments OR P incentive to sit out 1st action and wait
Parklane reason 2
couldn’t have joined SEC action and filed before them
Parklane reason 3
Parklane every reason to litigate fully against SEC
Nonmutual preclusion __ in Fed Court, states ___
is available, have own common law
Nonmutual preclusion in diversity causes __
Erie problem
For nonmutual preclusion ___, where lawyering happens
need all 4 things or just some
4 considerations for nonmutual preclusion
could join 1st action, incentive to fully litigate, if discovery procedures as robust, train problem of inconsistency
Parklane holds don’t care if one action ___
decided by jury and one by judge
Parklane dissent critique
matters if one decided by jury, point of jury to get inconsistent judgment, depends on view of juries
Martin rule
A judgment or decree only binding on the parties to a lawsuit and no impact on rights of non-party who was not joined, even if non-party had opportunity to intervene
Martin holding
white FF claims not precluded since not parties to consent decree
Martin reason
Parties know best who relief might affect, so burden on them to bring them in
Martin dissent
if remain on sidelines, may be harmed practically even if rights are unaffected but bystander no right to appeal
Under B2 whether precluded from seeking alternative or further injunctive relief, use ___
Hansberry analysis to see if absent members are bound
Mendoza holding
nonmutual issue preclusion ordinarily not availabel against the Fed govt
