Brown v. Felsen

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that claims arising from same transaction and previously available to plaintiff axe also barred even if not asserted in first proceeding
• holding that res judicata does not apply to those dischargeability issues with respect to which the bankruptcy court has exclusive jurisdiction
• recognizing that preclusion doctrine encompasses that “were previously available to the parties, regardless of whether they were asserted or determined in the first proceeding”
• holding that bankruptcy courts are not bound by res judicata when considering the dischargeability of a debt
• recognizing that by promoting repose and stability in judgments, collateral estoppel often \blockades unexplored paths that may lead to truth\
• holding that the bankruptcy court was not precluded from looking behind the state-court stipulation and judgment to determine whether a debt was nondischargeable because it was a debt for money obtained by fraud

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).