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.
4 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 25 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Gooch v. Life Investors Insurance Co. of America.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Gooch v. Life Investors Insurance Co. of America Anchor | green | “a court is on notice that it has previously decided the issue presented.” | 7 |
| 2 | Melissa Rawe Thomas J. Rawe Kimberly Rawe v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company Cynthia Holtcamp | green | “claim preclusion refers to the effect of a judgment in foreclosing litigation of a matter that never has been litigated, because of a determination that it should have been advanced in an earlier suit.” | 7 |
| 3 | Melissa Rawe Thomas J. Rawe Kimberly Rawe v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company Cynthia Holtcamp | green | “issue preclusion refers to the effect of a judgment in foreclosing relitigation of a matter that has been litigated and decided.” | 7 |
| 4 | Notredan, LLC v. Old Republic Exchange Facilitator Co. | green | “claim preclusion bars not only relitigating a claim previously adjudicated, it also bars litigating a claim or defense that should have been raised, but was not, in the prior suit.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.