6 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 55 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 Heacock v. Heacock.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Heacock v. Heacock Anchor | green | “the doctrine of claim preclusion makes a valid, final judgment conclusive on the parties and their privies, and bars further litigation of all matters that were or should have been adjudicated in the action.” | 17 |
| 2 | Kobrin v. Board of Registration in Medicine | green | “(1) the identity or privity of the parties to the present and prior actions, (2) identity of the cause of action, and (3) prior final judgment on the merits.” | 16 |
| 3 | Oscar Cruz v. Melecio | green | “state law, with all its wrinkles, applies in deciding the res judicata effect of a state court judgment in a federal court.” | 7 |
| 4 | Maher v. Hyde | green | “it is well-accepted that federal courts may take judicial notice of proceedings in other courts if those proceedings have relevance to the matters at hand.” | 7 |
| 5 | Mestek, Inc. v. United Pacific Insurance | green | “because a motion to dismiss is not one of the specific categories of dismissal which is excluded by the plain language of mass. r. civ. p. 41(b)(3), we view a motion to dismiss under mass. r. civ. p. 12(b)(6) as an adjudication on the merits.” | 4 |
| 6 | Depianti v. Jan-Pro Franchising International, Inc. | green | “under both massachusetts law and federal law, 'a trial court judgment is final and has preclusive effect regardless of the fact that it is on appeal.” | 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.