1. Mon. Dec. 3

2. claim preclusion

3. scope of a claim

4. Rest. (2d) of Judgments § 24. Dimensions Of “Claim” For Purposes Of Merger Or Bar—General Rule Concerning “Splitting” (1) When a valid and final judgment rendered in an action extinguishes the plaintiff's claim pursuant to the rules of merger or bar the claim extinguished includes all rights of the plaintiff to remedies against the defendant with respect to all or any part of the transaction, or series of connected transactions, out of which the action arose. (2) What factual grouping constitutes a “transaction”, and what groupings constitute a “series”, are to be determined pragmatically, giving weight to such considerations as whether the facts are related in time, space, origin, or motivation, whether they form a convenient trial unit, and whether their treatment as a unit conforms to the parties' expectations or business understanding or usage.

5. Commercial Box & Lumber Co. Uniroyal Inc. (5 th Cir. 1980)

6. - P sues D (a municipality) for employment discrimination on the basis of sex under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Judgment for P with injunctive relief, but no compensatory damages, since it was held they are not available under Title VII - Subsequently the Supreme Court decides that compensatory damages are available against municipalities under 42 USC 1983 - P sues D under 1983 for compensatory damages for the past employment discrimination. - Claim precluded?

7. P sues D for mild asbestosis caused by asbestos exposure. P receives damages. Years later, he develops deadly mesothelioma, a cancer caused by asbestos. P sues D for this harm. Claim precluded?

8. “on the merits”

9. § 20. Judgment For Defendant—Exceptions To The General Rule Of Bar (1) A personal judgment for the defendant, although valid and final, does not bar another action by the plaintiff on the same claim: (a) When the judgment is one of dismissal for lack of jurisdiction, for improper venue, or for nonjoinder or misjoinder of parties; or (b) When the plaintiff agrees to or elects a nonsuit (or voluntary dismissal) without prejudice or the court directs that the plaintiff be nonsuited (or that the action be otherwise dismissed) without prejudice; or (c) When by statute or rule of court the judgment does not operate as a bar to another action on the same claim, or does not so operate unless the court specifies, and no such specification is made.

10. (2) A valid and final personal judgment for the defendant, which rests on the prematurity of the action or on the plaintiff's failure to satisfy a precondition to suit, does not bar another action by the plaintiff instituted after the claim has matured, or the precondition has been satisfied, unless a second action is precluded by operation of the substantive law.

11. issue preclusion

12. If in an earlier case an issue was - actually litigated and decided - litigated fairly and fully - and essential to the decision then the earlier determination of the issue precludes relitigation of the same issue by someone who was a party or in privity with a party in the earlier litigation

13. Little v. Blue Goose Motor Coach (Ill. 1931)

14. - P sues D for breach of a contract to buy 10 shares of the C Corp. every month for 2 years - D introduces the defense of fraud, on the ground that at the time they entered into the contract P lied to D about the C Corp.’s oil assets - D loses on that issue; judgment for P Subsequently D breaches the contract again - P sues D and D introduces two defenses: statute of frauds (the contract was not in writing) fraud (at the time that they entered into the contract, P lied to D about the C Corp.’s coal assets) - Is D issue precluded?

15. Jacobson v. Miller (Mich. 1879)

16. If in an earlier case an issue was - actually litigated and decided - litigated fairly and fully - and essential to the decision then the earlier determination of the issue precludes relitigation of the same issue by someone who was a party or in privity with a party in the earlier litigation

17. actually litigated and decided

18. - P sues D for negligence - D introduces the affirmative defense of contributory negligence in his answer - At trial, no evidence for or against contributory negligence is offered by either side and the jury finds for P - Would D be issue precluded from relitigating P’s negligence?

19. default judgment? summary judgment? consent judgment?

20. essential to the judgment?

21. Cambria v. Jeffery (Mass. 1940)

22. - P sues D for interest on note - D alleges fraud in execution of note and release of obligation to pay interest - P wins - P then sues for principal - conclusive on question of fraud? - what if D had won (held not liable)?