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 2 cases, quoted by 23 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 Highway J Citizens Group v. United States Department Of Transportation.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Highway J Citizens Group v. United States Department Of Transportation Anchor | green | “a final judgment on the merits of an action precludes the parties or their privies from relitigating issues that were or could have been raised in that action.” | 10 |
| 2 | Ralphael Okoro v. Randall Bohman | green | “a subsequent suit is barred if the claim on which it is based arises from the same incident, events, transaction, circumstances, or other factual nebula as a prior suit that had gone to final judgment.” | 5 |
| 3 | Ralphael Okoro v. Randall Bohman | green | “same incident, events, transaction, circumstances, or other factual nebula as a prior suit that had gone to final judgment.” | 4 |
| 4 | Highway J Citizens Group v. United States Department Of Transportation | green | “identity with a previously litigated matter if it emerges from the same core of operative facts as that earlier action.” | 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.