Res Judicata and Permissive Joinder of Claims

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
nyg22

New
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 2:31 am

Res Judicata and Permissive Joinder of Claims

Postby nyg22 » Sun Dec 09, 2012 4:38 pm

Hi all,

Wanted to run a thought by you.

Res Judicata bars 2nd suits on all claims that "were brought or could have been brought" + the other 3 elements

Scenario
First suit - X sues Z for battery
Second suit - X sues Z for unrelated contract claim

X could have brought unrelated contract claim in first suit via FRCP 18. My thought is that the second suit will not be barred though, because the contract claim does not emanate from the "same transaction or occurrence"

Do you all read the rules the same way?

User avatar
Tom Joad

Gold
Posts: 4528
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:56 pm

Re: Res Judicata and Permissive Joinder of Claims

Postby Tom Joad » Sun Dec 09, 2012 4:40 pm

Yes.

User avatar
Doorkeeper

Gold
Posts: 4869
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:25 pm

Re: Res Judicata and Permissive Joinder of Claims

Postby Doorkeeper » Sun Dec 09, 2012 4:47 pm

Tom Joad wrote:Yes.

TCR.

User avatar
thelong

Silver
Posts: 992
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 10:55 am

Re: Res Judicata and Permissive Joinder of Claims

Postby thelong » Sun Dec 09, 2012 4:52 pm

Doorkeeper wrote:
Tom Joad wrote:Yes.

TCR.

Yep. Remember, it's "claim" preclusion, not "case" preclusion.

User avatar
omninode

Bronze
Posts: 405
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 2:09 pm

Re: Res Judicata and Permissive Joinder of Claims

Postby omninode » Mon Dec 10, 2012 11:52 pm

thelong wrote:
Doorkeeper wrote:
Tom Joad wrote:Yes.

TCR.

Yep. Remember, it's "claim" preclusion, not "case" preclusion.


Thank you. That is a great way to sum up the distinction, imo.



Return to “Forum for Law School Students�

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests