Anderson v. Phoenix Investment Counsel of Boston, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that when no effort was made to present state claims to a federal court, the state court must presume that federal judgment is res judicata
• holding that when no effort was made to present state claims to a federal court, the state court must presume that federal judgment is res judicata
• ruling that preclusive effects of a federal judgment should be determined under federal law, and that failure to assert state claims under federal court’s pendent jurisdiction raised bar to second action in state court
• stating that the SJC need not determine the modifying effect, if any, that the provision has on claim preclusion or issue preclusion
• federal judgment under Investment Advisers Act of 1940 barred unfair and deceptive trade practices claim in state court
• both claim and issue preclusion “‘relieve parties of the cost and vexation of multiple lawsuits, conserve judicial resources, and, by preventing inconsistent decisions, encourage reliance on adjudication’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).