Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
14 California opinions name it 2 courts 1992–2025 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Brinton v. Bankers Pension Services, Inc.green2 sentences2016(Bernhard v. Bank of America, supra, 19 Cal.2d at p. 813 ; Thibodeau v. Crum (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 749, 755 [ 6 Cal.Rptr.2d 27 ] (Thibodeau).) Although res judicata is usually applied to judicial decisions, a prior judgment confirming an arbitration award may also bar a subsequent lawsuit based on the same cause of action. (§ 1287.4; Thibodeau, supra, at p. 755 ; Brinton v. Bankers Pension Services, Inc. (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 550, 556-558 [ 90 Cal.Rptr.2d 469 ]; Sartor v. Superior Court (1982) 136 Cal.App.3d 322, 328 [ 187 Cal.Rptr. 247 ].) “But the rule goes further. 2016(Bernhard v. Bank of America, supra, 19 Cal.2d at p. 813 ; Thibodeau v. Crum (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 749, 755 [ 6 Cal.Rptr.2d 27 ] (Thibodeau).) Although res judicata is usually applied to judicial decisions, a prior judgment confirming an arbitration award may also bar a subsequent lawsuit based on the same cause of action. (§ 1287.4; Thibodeau, supra, at p. 755 ; Brinton v. Bankers Pension Services, Inc. (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 550, 556-558 [ 90 Cal.Rptr.2d 469 ]; Sartor v. Superior Court (1982) 136 Cal.App.3d 322, 328 [ 187 Cal.Rptr. 247 ].) “But the rule goes further. | 3 | 4 |
Vandenberg v. Superior Courtgreen2 sentences2025(Vandenberg, supra, 21 Cal.4th at p. 824, fn. 2 .) We have accordingly conducted an independent review of the architects’ contention that the causes of action in the underlying action are barred by the arbitration award in 11 favor of Online Builders. 2022(Vandenberg v. Superior Court (1999) 21 Cal.4th 815, 824, fn. 2 (Vandenberg); see Brinton v. Bankers Pension Services, Inc. (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 550, 557-558 [finding that a nonparty to an arbitration can assert a claim preclusion defense based on the arbitration award where its liability was derivative of that of a party to the arbitration].) Citing Vandenberg, Respondents argue that CLI and Concert were not bound by the arbitration award because they were not parties to the arbitration. | 2 | 2 |
Conner v. Dart Transportation Servicegreen2 sentences2014(Conner v. Dart Transportation Service (1976) 65 Cal.App.3d 320, 322-323 [ 135 Cal.Rptr. 259 ].) An arbitration award therefore can bar identical causes of action in court and have collateral estoppel effect (Wade, at p. 653), and the DRRP provision is consistent with California law and not unconscionable. 4. 2014(Conner v. Dart Transportation Service (1976) 65 Cal.App.3d 320, 322-323 [ 135 Cal.Rptr. 259 ].) An arbitration award therefore can bar identical causes of action in court and have collateral estoppel effect (Wade, at p. 653), and the DRRP provision is consistent with California law and not unconscionable. 4. | 1 | 2 |
Bush v. Horizon Westgreen1 sentence2024An arbitration award therefore can bar identical causes of action in court and have collateral estoppel effect”].) 11 holding does not apply”]; Daniels, supra, 212 Cal.App.4th at p. 677 [“Ruiz ha[s] no bearing on third party wrongful death claims outside the context of section 1295”]; Bush v. Horizon West (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 924, 929 [Ruiz not applicable where case did not involve a wrongful death claim predicated on medical malpractice].) To the extent these cases hold otherwise, we respectfully disagree. | 1 | 1 |
Daniels v. Sunrise Senior Living, Inc.green2 sentences2024An arbitration award therefore can bar identical causes of action in court and have collateral estoppel effect”].) 11 holding does not apply”]; Daniels, supra, 212 Cal.App.4th at p. 677 [“Ruiz ha[s] no bearing on third party wrongful death claims outside the context of section 1295”]; Bush v. Horizon West (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 924, 929 [Ruiz not applicable where case did not involve a wrongful death claim predicated on medical malpractice].) To the extent these cases hold otherwise, we respectfully disagree. 2024An arbitration award therefore can bar identical causes of action in court and have collateral estoppel effect”].) 11 holding does not apply”]; Daniels, supra, 212 Cal.App.4th at p. 677 [“Ruiz ha[s] no bearing on third party wrongful death claims outside the context of section 1295”]; Bush v. Horizon West (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 924, 929 [Ruiz not applicable where case did not involve a wrongful death claim predicated on medical malpractice].) To the extent these cases hold otherwise, we respectfully disagree. | 1 | 1 |
Avila v. S. Cal. Specialty Care, Inc.green2 sentences2024(See, e.g., Avila, supra, 20 Cal.App.5th at p. 842 [“If the primary basis for the wrongful death claim sounds in professional negligence as defined by MICRA, then section 1295 applies. 2024(See, e.g., Avila, supra, 20 Cal.App.5th at p. 842 [“If the primary basis for the wrongful death claim sounds in professional negligence as defined by MICRA, then section 1295 applies. | 1 | 1 |
Sartor v. Superior Courtgreen2 sentences2016(Bernhard v. Bank of America, supra, 19 Cal.2d at p. 813 ; Thibodeau v. Crum (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 749, 755 [ 6 Cal.Rptr.2d 27 ] (Thibodeau).) Although res judicata is usually applied to judicial decisions, a prior judgment confirming an arbitration award may also bar a subsequent lawsuit based on the same cause of action. (§ 1287.4; Thibodeau, supra, at p. 755 ; Brinton v. Bankers Pension Services, Inc. (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 550, 556-558 [ 90 Cal.Rptr.2d 469 ]; Sartor v. Superior Court (1982) 136 Cal.App.3d 322, 328 [ 187 Cal.Rptr. 247 ].) “But the rule goes further. 2016(Bernhard v. Bank of America, supra, 19 Cal.2d at p. 813 ; Thibodeau v. Crum (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 749, 755 [ 6 Cal.Rptr.2d 27 ] (Thibodeau).) Although res judicata is usually applied to judicial decisions, a prior judgment confirming an arbitration award may also bar a subsequent lawsuit based on the same cause of action. (§ 1287.4; Thibodeau, supra, at p. 755 ; Brinton v. Bankers Pension Services, Inc. (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 550, 556-558 [ 90 Cal.Rptr.2d 469 ]; Sartor v. Superior Court (1982) 136 Cal.App.3d 322, 328 [ 187 Cal.Rptr. 247 ].) “But the rule goes further. | 1 | 1 |
Thibodeau v. Crumgreen2 sentences2016(Bernhard v. Bank of America, supra, 19 Cal.2d at p. 813 ; Thibodeau v. Crum (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 749, 755 [ 6 Cal.Rptr.2d 27 ] (Thibodeau).) Although res judicata is usually applied to judicial decisions, a prior judgment confirming an arbitration award may also bar a subsequent lawsuit based on the same cause of action. (§ 1287.4; Thibodeau, supra, at p. 755 ; Brinton v. Bankers Pension Services, Inc. (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 550, 556-558 [ 90 Cal.Rptr.2d 469 ]; Sartor v. Superior Court (1982) 136 Cal.App.3d 322, 328 [ 187 Cal.Rptr. 247 ].) “But the rule goes further. 2016(Bernhard v. Bank of America, supra, 19 Cal.2d at p. 813 ; Thibodeau v. Crum (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 749, 755 [ 6 Cal.Rptr.2d 27 ] (Thibodeau).) Although res judicata is usually applied to judicial decisions, a prior judgment confirming an arbitration award may also bar a subsequent lawsuit based on the same cause of action. (§ 1287.4; Thibodeau, supra, at p. 755 ; Brinton v. Bankers Pension Services, Inc. (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 550, 556-558 [ 90 Cal.Rptr.2d 469 ]; Sartor v. Superior Court (1982) 136 Cal.App.3d 322, 328 [ 187 Cal.Rptr. 247 ].) “But the rule goes further. | 1 | 1 |
United Paperworkers International Union v. Misco, Inc.green2 sentences2010(Paperworkers v. Misco, Inc. (1987) 484 U.S. 29, 42 [ 98 L.Ed.2d 286 , 108 S.Ct. 364 ]; Moncharsh, supra, at pp. 28-29, 31-33 .) “A court’s refusal to enforce an arbitrator’s award under a collective-bargaining agreement because it is contrary to public policy is a specific application of the more general doctrine, rooted in the common law, that a court may refuse to enforce contracts that violate law or public policy.” (Misco, supra, 484 U.S. at p. 42 .) In any event, whether an arbitration award in violation of public policy may be properly categorized as an award in excess of the arbitrator 2010(Paperworkers v. Misco, Inc. (1987) 484 U.S. 29, 42 [ 98 L.Ed.2d 286 , 108 S.Ct. 364 ]; Moncharsh, supra, at pp. 28-29, 31-33 .) “A court’s refusal to enforce an arbitrator’s award under a collective-bargaining agreement because it is contrary to public policy is a specific application of the more general doctrine, rooted in the common law, that a court may refuse to enforce contracts that violate law or public policy.” (Misco, supra, 484 U.S. at p. 42 .) In any event, whether an arbitration award in violation of public policy may be properly categorized as an award in excess of the arbitrator | 1 | 1 |
Ray Wilson Co. v. Anaheim Memorial Hospital Ass'ngreen2 sentences1992(E.g., Cobler v. Stanley, Barber, Southard, Brown & Associates (1990) 217 Cd.App.3d 518, 526 [ 265 Cal.Rptr. 868 ]; All Points Traders, Inc. v. Barrington Associates (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 723, 736 [ 259 Cal.Rptr. 780 ]; National Football League Players’ Assn. v. National Football League Management Council (1986) 188 Cal.App.3d 192, 199 [ 233 Cal.Rptr. 147 ]; Ray Wilson Co. v. Anaheim Memorial Hospital Assn. (1985) 166 Cal.App.3d 1081, 1090 [ 213 Cal.Rptr. 62 ]; Abbott v. California State Auto. 1992(E.g., Cobler v. Stanley, Barber, Southard, Brown & Associates (1990) 217 Cd.App.3d 518, 526 [ 265 Cal.Rptr. 868 ]; All Points Traders, Inc. v. Barrington Associates (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 723, 736 [ 259 Cal.Rptr. 780 ]; National Football League Players’ Assn. v. National Football League Management Council (1986) 188 Cal.App.3d 192, 199 [ 233 Cal.Rptr. 147 ]; Ray Wilson Co. v. Anaheim Memorial Hospital Assn. (1985) 166 Cal.App.3d 1081, 1090 [ 213 Cal.Rptr. 62 ]; Abbott v. California State Auto. | 1 | 1 |
Cobler v. Stanley, Barber, Southard, Brown & Associatesgreen2 sentences1992(E.g., Cobler v. Stanley, Barber, Southard, Brown & Associates (1990) 217 Cal. App.3d 518, 526 [ 265 Cal. Rptr. 868 ]; All Points Traders, Inc. v. Barrington Associates (1989) 211 Cal. App.3d 723, 736 [ 259 Cal. Rptr. 780 ]; National Football League Players' Assn. v. National Football League Management Council (1986) 188 Cal. App.3d 192, 199 [ 233 Cal. Rptr. 147 ]; Ray Wilson Co. v. Anaheim Memorial Hospital Assn. (1985) 166 Cal. App.3d 1081, 1090 [ 213 Cal. Rptr. 62 ]; Abbott v. California State Auto. 1992(E.g., Cobler v. Stanley, Barber, Southard, Brown & Associates (1990) 217 Cd.App.3d 518, 526 [ 265 Cal.Rptr. 868 ]; All Points Traders, Inc. v. Barrington Associates (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 723, 736 [ 259 Cal.Rptr. 780 ]; National Football League Players’ Assn. v. National Football League Management Council (1986) 188 Cal.App.3d 192, 199 [ 233 Cal.Rptr. 147 ]; Ray Wilson Co. v. Anaheim Memorial Hospital Assn. (1985) 166 Cal.App.3d 1081, 1090 [ 213 Cal.Rptr. 62 ]; Abbott v. California State Auto. | 1 | 1 |
All Points Traders, Inc. v. Barrington Associatesgreen2 sentences1992(E.g., Cobler v. Stanley, Barber, Southard, Brown & Associates (1990) 217 Cd.App.3d 518, 526 [ 265 Cal.Rptr. 868 ]; All Points Traders, Inc. v. Barrington Associates (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 723, 736 [ 259 Cal.Rptr. 780 ]; National Football League Players’ Assn. v. National Football League Management Council (1986) 188 Cal.App.3d 192, 199 [ 233 Cal.Rptr. 147 ]; Ray Wilson Co. v. Anaheim Memorial Hospital Assn. (1985) 166 Cal.App.3d 1081, 1090 [ 213 Cal.Rptr. 62 ]; Abbott v. California State Auto. 1992(E.g., Cobler v. Stanley, Barber, Southard, Brown & Associates (1990) 217 Cd.App.3d 518, 526 [ 265 Cal.Rptr. 868 ]; All Points Traders, Inc. v. Barrington Associates (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 723, 736 [ 259 Cal.Rptr. 780 ]; National Football League Players’ Assn. v. National Football League Management Council (1986) 188 Cal.App.3d 192, 199 [ 233 Cal.Rptr. 147 ]; Ray Wilson Co. v. Anaheim Memorial Hospital Assn. (1985) 166 Cal.App.3d 1081, 1090 [ 213 Cal.Rptr. 62 ]; Abbott v. California State Auto. | 1 | 1 |
National Football League Players' Ass'n v. National Football League Management Councilgreen2 sentences1992(E.g., Cobler v. Stanley, Barber, Southard, Brown & Associates (1990) 217 Cd.App.3d 518, 526 [ 265 Cal.Rptr. 868 ]; All Points Traders, Inc. v. Barrington Associates (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 723, 736 [ 259 Cal.Rptr. 780 ]; National Football League Players’ Assn. v. National Football League Management Council (1986) 188 Cal.App.3d 192, 199 [ 233 Cal.Rptr. 147 ]; Ray Wilson Co. v. Anaheim Memorial Hospital Assn. (1985) 166 Cal.App.3d 1081, 1090 [ 213 Cal.Rptr. 62 ]; Abbott v. California State Auto. 1992(E.g., Cobler v. Stanley, Barber, Southard, Brown & Associates (1990) 217 Cd.App.3d 518, 526 [ 265 Cal.Rptr. 868 ]; All Points Traders, Inc. v. Barrington Associates (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 723, 736 [ 259 Cal.Rptr. 780 ]; National Football League Players’ Assn. v. National Football League Management Council (1986) 188 Cal.App.3d 192, 199 [ 233 Cal.Rptr. 147 ]; Ray Wilson Co. v. Anaheim Memorial Hospital Assn. (1985) 166 Cal.App.3d 1081, 1090 [ 213 Cal.Rptr. 62 ]; Abbott v. California State Auto. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Bernhard v. Bank of America National Trust & Saving Association
green
2 sentences2016(Bernhard v. Bank of America, supra, 19 Cal.2d at p. 813 ; Thibodeau v. Crum (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 749, 755 [ 6 Cal.Rptr.2d 27 ] (Thibodeau).) Although res judicata is usually applied to judicial decisions, a prior judgment confirming an arbitration award may also bar a subsequent lawsuit based on the same cause of action. (§ 1287.4; Thibodeau, supra, at p. 755 ; Brinton v. Bankers Pension Services, Inc. (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 550, 556-558 [ 90 Cal.Rptr.2d 469 ]; Sartor v. Superior Court (1982) 136 Cal.App.3d 322, 328 [ 187 Cal.Rptr. 247 ].) “But the rule goes further. 2014(Bernhard v. Bank of America (1942) 19 Cal.2d 807, 813 ; see also Brinton v. Bankers Pension Services, Inc. (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 550, 556 (Brinton).) Although res judicata is usually applied based on a prior judicial decision, a prior judgment confirming an arbitration award may also bar a subsequent claim based on the same cause of action. | 2 | 2014–2016 |
Moncharsh v. Heily & Blase
green
2 sentences2010The key consideration for our purposes is that the public policy exception must be applied with care. “[T]he normal rule of limited judicial review may not be avoided by a claim that a provision of the contract, construed or applied by the arbitrator, is ‘illegal,’ except in rare cases when according finality to the arbitrator’s decision would be incompatible with the protection of a statutory right.” (Moncharsh, supra, 3 Cal.4th at p. 33 .) “Absent a clear expression of illegality or public policy undermining this strong presumption in favor of private arbitration, an arbitral award should or 1996Therefore, according to defendant, we are free to find that the former rule disapproved in Moncharsh ( 3 Cal.4th at p. 28 )—that the courts may vacate an arbitration award for an error of fact or *1289 law appearing on the face of the award and causing substantial injustice— still ought to apply to arbitrations carried out under statutory compulsion. | 2 | 1996–2010 |
Bucur v. Ahmad
green
1 sentence2023(Mycogen, at p. 897.) “Although res judicata is usually applied to judicial decisions, a prior judgment confirming an arbitration award may also bar a subsequent lawsuit based on the same 12 cause of action. [Citations.]” (Bucur v. Ahmad (2016) 244 Cal.App.4th 175, 185 .) Res judicata applies “ ‘only if (1) the decision in the prior proceeding is final and on the merits; (2) the present action is on the same cause of action as the prior proceeding; and (3) the parties in the present action or parties in privity with them were parties to the prior proceeding.’ [Citation.]” (Franceschi, supra, 1 | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Franceschi v. Franchise Tax Board
green
1 sentence2023(Mycogen, at p. 897.) “Although res judicata is usually applied to judicial decisions, a prior judgment confirming an arbitration award may also bar a subsequent lawsuit based on the same 12 cause of action. [Citations.]” (Bucur v. Ahmad (2016) 244 Cal.App.4th 175, 185 .) Res judicata applies “ ‘only if (1) the decision in the prior proceeding is final and on the merits; (2) the present action is on the same cause of action as the prior proceeding; and (3) the parties in the present action or parties in privity with them were parties to the prior proceeding.’ [Citation.]” (Franceschi, supra, 1 | 1 | 2023–2023 |
DKN Holdings LLC v. Faerber
green
1 sentence2022(DKN Holdings, supra, 61 Cal.4th at pp. 824- 825.) A prior judgment confirming an arbitration award may bar a subsequent lawsuit on the same cause of action. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Superior Court
green
1 sentence2015Proc., § 1286.2, subd. (a)(4).) In PG&E, this court held that an arbitrator exceeds his powers in construing a contract when the arbitrator “arbitrarily remakes the contract” and thus commits an “error so egregious that it produces a result completely outside the expectations of the parties to [the] contract.” (PG&E, supra, 15 Cal.App.4th at p. 582 .) “[S]uccess in vacating an arbitration award under this standard requires more than a mere conviction that another construction of the contract is plainly correct. . . . [A]rbitrators do not exceed their powers merely by reaching an erroneous deci | 1 | 2015–2015 |
City of Oakland v. Oakland Police & Fire Retirement System
green
1 sentence2014“California employs the primary rights theory to determine if two successive proceedings involve the same cause of action. [Citation.]” (Brinton, supra, 76 Cal.App.4th at p. 557-558 .) “Under this theory, a ‘cause of action’ is comprised of a primary right possessed by the plaintiff, a corresponding duty imposed upon the defendant, and a wrong done by the defendant which is a breach of such primary right and duty. [Citation.] The primary right is the plaintiff’s right to be free of the particular injury, regardless of the legal theory on which liability is premised or the remedy which is sough | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Wright v. Universal Maritime Service Corp.
green
2 sentences2001As noted, the federal district court in this case cited Doyle v. Raley’s Inc. to support the proposition that the arbitration award did not bar Camargo from filing suit under the FEHA. 5 The court also concluded that the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, which had held that even an employee’s statutory discrimination claims were subject to compulsory arbitration in the first instance under a CBA, had misinterpreted both Gardner-Denver and Gilmer. ( Torrez, supra, 58 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1249-1250, 1256-1259.) In light of the United States Supreme Court’s later reversal of the Fourth Circuit on a 2001As noted, the federal district court in this case cited Doyle v. Raley’s Inc. to support the proposition that the arbitration award did not bar Camargo from filing suit under the FEHA. 5 The court also concluded that the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, which had held that even an employee’s statutory discrimination claims were subject to compulsory arbitration in the first instance under a CBA, had misinterpreted both Gardner-Denver and Gilmer. ( Torrez, supra, 58 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1249-1250, 1256-1259.) In light of the United States Supreme Court’s later reversal of the Fourth Circuit on a | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.