Topic: for purposes of res judicata, it is not necessary to ask if… · Go Syfert
← All topics

Topic #563

7 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 681 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 Harnett v. Billman.

#Case FlagCanonical passage Citers
1 Harnett v. Billman Anchor
ca4 · 1986
green “for purposes of res judicata, it is not necessary to ask if the plaintiff knew of his present claim at the time of the former judgment, for it is the existence of the present claim, not party awareness of it, that controls.” 101
2 Kenny v. Quigg
ca4 · 1987
green “valid, final judgment on the merits” 99
3 Meyer v. Berkshire Life Insurance
ca4 · 2004
green “deliberate, clear , and unambiguous statements by counsel may be considered judicial admissions that bind the conceding party to the representations made.” 97
4 David Schwartz v. J.J.F. Management Services
ca4 · 2019
green “from the same cause of action as previous litigation between the parties.” 96
5 East Coast Repair v. United States
ca4 · 2021
green “we use contract interpretation principles to discern the parties' intent.” 96
6 East Coast Repair v. United States
ca4 · 2021
green “when a settlement agreement's text is unambiguous, . . . the court simply cannot rewrite its terms based on a party's protestation that it meant something other than what it said.” 96
7 Keith v. Aldridge
ca4 · 1990
green “this approach. . . dictates application of contract interpretation principles to determine the intent of the parties.” 96

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.

← Caselaw search · Hot / Trending / Newly red · Brief Check