Litigation in Federal Court
Claim & Issue Preclusion
Claim Preclusion — Res Judicata
Transactional Res Judicata Test: parties cannot relitigate claims that were or could’ve been decided in a first suit if:
[1] A final judgment on the merits was issued,
[2] The claims arise from the same set of operative facts (“transaction”), and
[3] The same parties were involved.
Rule: Remember the Gibbs test; unrelated claims are not barred by claim preclusion on a certain case.
Issue Preclusion
Mutual Collateral Estoppel Test: Parties cannot relitigate issues decided in a first suit if:
[1] Final Judgement (including default judgment)
[2] It pertains to the same issue
[3] The same parties were involved
[4] The issue was actually litigated, not including issues that may have been “let go” out of convenience or efficiency.
“Actually Litigated” Factors:
[1] Adversarial submission of evidence (did both sides present evidence?)
[2] Necessarily decided (did it prove or disprove a claim in the case?)
[3] Full and fair opportunity (did each party care to fully litigate the issue with the same intensity?)
Non-Mutual Issue Preclusion: use of disposition of an issue from another case by a non-party in a subsequent case. Essentially, a party not included in case 1 uses a finding from that litigation when facing the party in case 2.
Defensive: the non-party (generally the defendant) attacks the plaintiff for continuously suing parties, even after the issue was litigated in a previous case to which the defendant was a non-party.
Offensive: the defendant keeps losing on an issue, and the plaintiff wants to use that to prove a claim in their case (defendant previously found liable of polluting river, plaintiff tries to use last case’s finding in their case). May be allowed but generally disfavored.