Questions on Claim Preclusion

Introduction to Claim Preclusion: Study Questions

1. Keep in mind that Field and Kaplan use the term "res judicata" to apply to any preclusive effect of a judgment, whether it is claim or issue preclusion. But many courts use the term "res judicata" to refer to claim preclusion alone. This may be confusing, but is a confusion you will have to get used to, since the meaning of the term is not agreed upon within the legal community as a whole.

2. What's the difference between claim preclusion and the compulsory counterclaim rule? Between claim preclusion and issue preclusion?

3. What are the benefits of claim preclusion? The costs?

4. How far does a case have to proceed before it will have claim preclusive effect? Issue preclusive effect? Does the case have to have been appealed for it to have claim or issue preclusive effect?

Williamson v. Columbia Gas

[This is a difficult case, with lots going on in it.]

5. Why doesn't it matter that the suit having claim preclusive effect ("Suit 2") was brought after the suit claim precluded ("Suit 1")?

6. Had the stipulation concerning the accrual of the cause of action been made in Suit 1, it would probably not have barred the action on statute of limitations grounds. Why is that so? Given it is so, isn't it unfair to bar Suit 1 on the basis of the fact that Suit 2 came to a final judgment on statute of limitations grounds?

7. What, in the end, is the criterion used by the court for determining whether a subsequent action is barred by claim preclusion? Why is the term "cause of action" unhelpful to determine where claim preclusion exists? Shouldn't the fact that different statutes are at issue in Suit 1 and Suit 2 mean that Suit 2 has no claim preclusive effect on Suit 1?

8. Why is it that Williamson will be able to bring Suit 2 in another jurisdiction without it being barred? Do you think he will be able to bring Suit 1 in another jurisdiction as well?

Smith v. Kirkpatrick & O'Brien v. City of Syracuse

9. As O'Brien shows, Smith is not good law in New York anymore. It is also contrary to the federal rule concerning the scope of a claim. How does it go wrong?

10. Let's say that your landlord sets up a rendering plant next to your apartment. You move out and sue for constructive eviction. You lose, because the smells don't reach the point that they constructively evict you from the apartment. Can you sue immediately afterward for nuisance? Let's say you live in the apartment for another year. Can you sue for nuisance now?

11. It is 1954 (one year after Smith and 4 years after Williamson). P sues D for breach of contract in New York state court. P loses on statute of frauds grounds. Subsequently P sues D in in diversity federal court for quantuum meruit. Claim precluded or not?

Hennepin Paper

12. Think of the following problem. Let's say I sue you for state law fraud in state court concerning the sale of securities, but don't join a claim against you for federal securities fraud because that has exclusive federal jurisdiction. May I sue you later for federal securities fraud in federal court? Could the defendant argue claim preclusion on the ground that both the state and federal claim could have been brought together in federal court?

Consider the following cases:

1) P sues D for fraud. P loses. The next day P discovers that D had fabricated evidence. P brings a new suit against D concerning the fraud. What result?

2) P sues D in federal court for battery. A few days later D sues P for his own damages in the brawl.

3) P sues D in federal court for his physical damages as a result of a car accident. D defaults and P gets a default judgment. Subsequently P sues D for damages to his car as a result of that accident.

4) P sues D for battery in federal court in New York. D gets the action dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. P then sues D for the same battery in state court in New York. Claim precluded?

5) P sues D for nuisance. P gets a judgment with an injunction stopping the nuisance. D then brings suit against P to enjoin enforcement of the earlier judgment on the ground of a defense not mentioned in the earlier suit.

6) P sues D for nuisance. P gets a judgment of $100,000. D pays the judgment. Subsequently D sues P for restitution of the amount paid on the ground that D is not liable to P. In his suit D introduces a defense not mentioned in the first case.

7) P brings a quiet title action. It is determined that P owns the property. D, who failed to appear in the earlier action, brings a quiet title action concerning the same property. What result?

8) P sues D for breaching a contract requiring D to give P coal every winter. In the suit D challenges the validity of the contract. The court determines the contract to be valid. P wins damages from D. The next winter, D breaches again. P once again sues D for breach. In his answer, D offers the defense of claim preclusion and the defense that the contract is invalid.

9) P and D have 2-year oral lease under which P rents D an apartment. D is in the apartment for a while and does not pay. P sues in New York state court under the lease. The court holds that the lease is invalid because of the statute of frauds. P sues again to get the fair value of the apartment during the time that D lived in it. Barred by claim preclusion (assume the cases occurred in 1954)?

10) P’s landlord sets up a rendering plan next to P’s apartment building. The smell is so bad that P moves out of his apartment and sues for a declaratory judgment in New York state court that he does not have to pay the rent because of constructive eviction. P loses. P subsequently brings a simple nuisance action against D. Barred by claim preclusion (assume that the cases occurred in 1982)?

11) P sues D in state court under state antitrust law. P loses. Subsequently P brings a federal antitrust action in federal court concerning the same actions by D. Is P’s action claim precluded? What if the first action had been brought in federal court?

12) 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 inj 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?

13) African-American students as a class bring suit against school board for racial discrimination. The court holds that segregated schools is compatible with the 14th Amendment and enters judgment for the defendant. Afterward in Brown v Board of Education, the United States Supreme Court in an action between different parties strikes down as unconstitutional segregated education. The plaintiff class brings a new action. Claim precluded?

14) Wife sues husband for maintenance on the basis of desertion. Judgment for wife. Subsequently wife sues for divorce on the basis of same desertion. Claim precluded?

15) A mother is awarded custody of a minor child. The father, relying upon subsequently discovered evidence brings suit to determine that the wife is in fact unfit for have custody.

16) 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?

17) P sues D Railroad alleging that the conductor was negligent in starting the car while P was disembarking and that as a result P broke his arm. After judgment for P, P brings a new action against D alleging that after disembarking from the car he fell into a trench negligently left by D beside the road and broke his leg.

18) P sues D for breach of a contract, alleging that the car P bought did not meet specifications. After judgment for D, P sues D, for breach of contract, alleging late delivery of car as the breach.

Questions on Claim Splitting

Sutcliffe

1. Why did the plaintiff bring four different actions against the US?

2. What is the difference between claim splitting and claim preclusion?

3. Doesn't each action concern a different renewal period for the lease at issue? Why doesn't that make them different claims?

4. What if a defendant does not object to claim splitting and then one action comes to a judgment? May the defendant use claim preclusion to bar the other action? Why would allowing claim preclusion be unfair in such a case? Should issue preclusion still be allowed?

5. Does the defense of claim splitting apply when the claim is split into actions brought in different jurisdictions?

6. P brings two suits against D in the S.D.N.Y., one for the the loss of his right arm in a car accident and one for the loss of his left arm. D does not aks for a dismissal of one of the actions on claim splitting grounds. When the suit for the loss of his right arm comes to a judgment in P’s favor, D moves for summary judgment on the grounds of claim preclusion. Should claim preclusion be allowed?