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.
2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 8 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 Federation of Hillside & Canyon Associations v. City of Los Angeles.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Federation of Hillside & Canyon Associations v. City of Los Angeles Anchor | green | “res judicata bars the litigation not only of issues that were actually litigated but also issues that could have been litigated.” | 5 |
| 2 | ADAM BROS. FARMING v. County of Santa Barbara | green | “res judicata bars the litigation not only of issues that were actually litigated but also issues that could have been litigated.” | 3 |
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.