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.
7 Massachusetts opinions name it 5 courts 1983–2025 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Massachusetts 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 |
|---|---|---|
Kobrin v. Board of Registration in Medicinegreen1 sentence2025We do not agree that these doctrines apply.1 A party invoking claim preclusion must show, among other elements, that there is "identity of the cause of action." Kobrin v. Board of Registration in Med., 444 Mass. 837, 843 (2005), quoting DaLuz v. Department of Correction, 434 Mass. 40, 45 (2001). | 1 | 1 |
DaLuz v. Department of Correctiongreen1 sentence2025We do not agree that these doctrines apply.1 A party invoking claim preclusion must show, among other elements, that there is "identity of the cause of action." Kobrin v. Board of Registration in Med., 444 Mass. 837, 843 (2005), quoting DaLuz v. Department of Correction, 434 Mass. 40, 45 (2001). | 1 | 1 |
McSorley v. Town of Hancockgreen1 sentence2001See McSorley v. Hancock, 11 Mass.App.Ct. 563, 565 (1981) (comparing the doctrines of claim preclusion and issue preclusion). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Massachusetts. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Heacock v. Heacock
green
1 sentence2021Heacock v. Heacock, 402 Mass. 21 , 23 (1988); Santos v. U.S. Bank Nat. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
DiVenuti v. Reardon
green
1 sentence2018In denying relief, the judge pointed to the "undisputed fact" of the plaintiffs' payment, Barros's attempt "to second guess those damages by arguing" what "creative counsel" might have done, as well as the doctrines of waiver and estoppel. 5 As we have said in the context of a late motion to amend the pleadings, "[a]mong the good reasons ... for which a motion to amend may be denied are that no justification for the lateness of the motion is apparent (beyond counsel for the moving party having had a late dawning idea) and that one or more of the nonmoving parties would be caught off balance by | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Alicea v. Commonwealth
green
2 sentences2017Alicea, 466 Mass. at 234-235 , citing Taylor v. Sturgell, 553 U.S. *825 880, 891 (2008). 8 “Under Federal common law, the doctrines of claim preclusion and issue preclusion (collectively, res judicata) define the preclusive effect of a prior judgment.” Alicea, supra at 235 . 2017Alicea, 466 Mass. at 234-235 , citing Taylor v. Sturgell, 553 U.S. *825 880, 891 (2008). 8 “Under Federal common law, the doctrines of claim preclusion and issue preclusion (collectively, res judicata) define the preclusive effect of a prior judgment.” Alicea, supra at 235 . | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Taylor v. Sturgell
green
1 sentence2013Under Federal common law, the doctrines of claim preclusion and issue preclusion (collectively, res judicata) define the preclusive effect of a prior judgment. 10 Taylor v. Sturgell, supra at 891-892 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Georgia, Florida & Alabama Railway Co. v. Blish Milling Co.
green
2 sentences1983Georgia, Fla. & Ala. Ry. v. Blish Milling Co., 241 U.S. 190, 198 , 36 S. Ct. 541 , 544 60 L. 1983Georgia, Fla. & Ala. Ry. v. Blish Milling Co., 241 U.S. 190, 198 , 36 S. Ct. 541 , 544 60 L. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
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.