Which doctrine prevents re-litigation of actually litigated issues in later cases?

Which doctrine prevents re-litigation of actually litigated issues in later cases?

• A. Res judicata bars claims that could have been raised in a final judgment.
• B. Statute of limitations.
• C. Judicial estoppel.
• D. Collateral estoppel prevents re-litigation of actually litigated issues in later cases.

Answer: (D)

Collateral estoppel, or issue preclusion, is the rule that stops relitigation of an issue that was actually litigated and essential to a prior judgment. For it to apply, the issue must have been actually fought and determined, the prior decision must have been on the merits, the party against whom it is invoked must have had a full and fair opportunity to litigate that issue, and the resolution of that issue must have been necessary to the judgment. When these conditions are met, that specific issue cannot be relitigated in later cases, even if the later case involves a different claim or cause of action. This is distinct from res judicata (claim preclusion), which bars reasserting a claim that could have been raised in a prior final judgment on the merits. It’s also different from the statute of limitations, which governs whether a claim is timely to be brought at all, not whether a previously decided issue can be relitigated. Judicial estoppel, meanwhile, prevents a party from taking a position in a legal proceeding that contradicts a position previously asserted, to avoid inconsistent positions, rather than preventing relitigation of an issue from a prior case.

Collateral estoppel, or issue preclusion, is the rule that stops relitigation of an issue that was actually litigated and essential to a prior judgment. For it to apply, the issue must have been actually fought and determined, the prior decision must have been on the merits, the party against whom it is invoked must have had a full and fair opportunity to litigate that issue, and the resolution of that issue must have been necessary to the judgment. When these conditions are met, that specific issue cannot be relitigated in later cases, even if the later case involves a different claim or cause of action.

This is distinct from res judicata (claim preclusion), which bars reasserting a claim that could have been raised in a prior final judgment on the merits. It’s also different from the statute of limitations, which governs whether a claim is timely to be brought at all, not whether a previously decided issue can be relitigated. Judicial estoppel, meanwhile, prevents a party from taking a position in a legal proceeding that contradicts a position previously asserted, to avoid inconsistent positions, rather than preventing relitigation of an issue from a prior case.