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 95 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 Schwartz v. Public Administrator.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Schwartz v. Public Administrator Anchor | green | “identity of issue which has necessarily been decided in the prior action and is decisive of the present action,” | 50 |
| 2 | Schwartz v. Public Administrator | green | “the size of the claim, the forum of the prior litigation, the use of initiative, the extent of the litigation, the competence and experience of counsel, the availability of new evidence, indications of a compromise verdict, differences in the applicable law and foreseeability of…” | 21 |
| 3 | Schwartz v. Public Administrator | green | “full and fair opportunity to contest the decision now said to be controlling” | 14 |
| 4 | Weiss v. Manfredi | green | “bars a party from relitigating in a subsequent proceeding an issue clearly raised in a prior proceeding and decided against that party where the party to be precluded had a full and fair opportunity to contest the prior determination.” | 10 |
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.