Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.

X

Preclusion Outline

Law Outlines > Civil Procedure (Duke Trina Jones) Outlines

This is an extract of our Preclusion document, which we sell as part of our Civil Procedure (Duke Trina Jones) Outlines collection written by the top tier of Duke University School Of Law students.

The following is a more accessble plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Civil Procedure (Duke Trina Jones) Outlines. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:

Preclusion

1.1. Claim preclusion I.

II. Rule 8(c): res judicata 4 elements a. The claim in the second action must be the same as that litigated in the first. i. Including claims that could have been brought in the first lawsuit ii. Same transaction test (used by the federal courts and many state courts): parties are barred from litigating in a second lawsuit any further claims that arise from the same transaction in the first lawsuit. iii. Same evidence test (some states): One suit precludes a second where the parties and the cause of action are identical. Causes of action are identical where the evidence necessary to sustain a second verdict would sustain the first. b. The parties must be the same i. Situations where a nonparty will be bound by a judgment

1. agreement by the parties to be bound by a prior action

2. preexisting substantive legal relationship (such as buyer and seller of property)

3. adequate representation by someone with the same interests who was a party (such as trustees, guardians, and other fiduciaries)

4. a party assuming control over prior litigation

5. party who loses an individual suit then suing again, this time as the representative of a class

6. special statutory schemes such as bankruptcy and probate proceedings, provided those proceedings comport with due process c. The judgment rendered in the first action must be final d. The judgment must have been rendered on the merits of the case i. Not on the merits: dismissals for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, lack of personal jurisdiction, improper venue, failure to join a party (Rule 41(b)) ii. Preclusion effect: default judgment; dismissal for failure to prosecute (P files an action and does not pursue it); summary judgment; (for most courts) dismissal for failure to state a claim Rationale for res judicata a. Respect for the first court's authority b. The parties' reliance on the settled rights c. The need to conserve judicial resources d. Prevents inconsistency e. More efficient f. Prevent harassment

Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Civil Procedure (Duke Trina Jones) Outlines.