Use of Final Judgment

Question 1

USE OF FINAL JUDGMENT

Answer 1

Where a claim or issue has already been resolved by litigation it may be barred from being re-litigated.

Question 2

Res judicata (claim preclusion)

Answer 2

Precludes relitigation of a claim that has been decided in prior litigation. A subsequent suit based on the same claim will be barred where the first claim meets the following requirements:

1. There is a valid final judgment on the merits.
   a. Federal: A judgment is final when the judgment is rendered.
   b. California: A judgment is final when the appeals have concluded.
2. The prior claim was actually litigated or could have been litigated.
3. The same plaintiff and same defendant were parties (or privies) in the prior case and subsequent case.
   a. A privy is a successor in interest to the property or claim, or is a representative (e.g., trustee) of the party.
   b. “Strangers” to the prior litigation cannot be bound under res judicata.
4. Both the prior case and the subsequent case assert the same claim.

Question 3

Same Claim-Res Judicata Federal

Answer 3

The “same claim” means the claim derives from the same transaction or occurrence.

Question 4

Same Claim-Res Judicata California

Answer 4

California follows the primary rights theory, which allows a separate cause of action for the invasion of each primary right. Thus, a plaintiff may sue separately for personal injury and property damage, even if both occurred from the same transaction or occurrence, since under the primary rights theory they are not considered the “same claim.” (E.g., a one-car accident causing both property damage and personal injury would implicate two different primary rights.)

Question 5

Collateral estoppel (issue preclusion)

Answer 5

Precludes relitigation of a particular issue that has already been decided in prior litigation. A subsequent suit based on the same issue will be barred where the first claim meets the following requirements:

1. There is a valid final judgment on the merits.
   a. Federal: A judgment is final when the judgment is rendered.
   b. California: A judgment is final when the appeals have concluded.
2. The same issue was actually litigated and necessarily determined.
3. The issue was essential to the judgment in the first case.
4. Determine who can rely on the prior judgment

Question 6

Traditionally Relying on Prior Judgment-Collateral Estoppel

Answer 6

Traditionally the rule of mutuality applied and a party asserting collateral estoppel had to be a party (or a privy) in the prior case to assert collateral estoppel in the subsequent case. Thus, a “stranger” to the first case could not use a prior judgment.

Question 7

California Relying on Prior Judgment-Collateral Estoppel

Answer 7

Allows a “stranger” to the prior case to rely on a prior judgment in the following circumstances:

1. The issues in the two cases are identical.
2. There is a valid final judgment on the merits.
3. The party against whom collateral estoppel is being asserted had a fair opportunity to be heard on the critical issue in the prior case.
4. It would not be unfair or inequitable to apply collateral estoppel.
5. California includes the additional requirement that the party against whom collateral estoppel is being asserted is a party or in privity with a party to the prior proceeding.