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.
3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 14 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 In Re the Estate of Hunter.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | In Re the Estate of Hunter Anchor | green | “a party may not litigate a claim where a judgment on the merits exists from a prior action between the same parties involving the same subject matter.” | 6 |
| 2 | In Re the Estate of Hunter | green | “once a claim is brought to a final conclusion, all other claims arising out of the same transaction or series of transactions are barred, even if based upon different theories or if seeking a different remedy.” | 6 |
| 3 | Insurance of State of Pennsylvania v. HSBC Bank USA | green | “approach to res judicata is arguably broader than the principles adopted by the federal courts.” | 2 |
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.