Christopher Owens Cynthia Hutchins,plaintiffs-Appellants v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan,inc., a California Corporation,defendant-Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that there are no “equitable exceptions to the application of res judicata based on ‘public policy’ or ‘simple justice’”
• holding that dismissal of prior action with prejudice based upon plaintiffs' failure to prosecute operates as an adjudication upon the merits under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b
• holding that defendant was not estopped from raising untimely res judicata defense
• holding Title VII claims were not exempt from claim preclusion where plaintiffs failed to seek a stay of proceedings or to amend their complaint
• holding that a dismissal “based upon plaintiffs’ failure to prosecute . . . operates as an adjudication upon the merits” and that, therefore, “involuntary dismissal generally acts as a judgment on the merits for the purposes of res judicata.” (simplified)
• stating that the central criterion to determine an identity of claims is whether the two suits arise “out of the same transactional nucleus of facts”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).