Skip to main content

Davis v. Davis

Citations

  • 663 A.2d 499
  • 1995 D.C. App. LEXIS 153
  • 1995 WL 461988

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that a plaintiff had a full and fair opportunity to litigate in a previous action where the Judge had held “successive hearings” and the plaintiff “had- the opportunity to present witnesses-and challenge contrary evidence”
  • finding that the issue of blood testing was “actually litigated” for the purposes of collateral estoppel because it had been raised in a motion for a blood test and again in a Rule 60(b) motion to vacate denial of that motion
  • finding that the issue of blood testing was “actually litigated” for the purposes of collateral estoppel because it had been raised in a motion for a blood test and 16 again in a Rule 60(b) motion to vacate denial of that motion
  • listing elements for issue preclusion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Ferren, Farrell, Ruiz

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

28 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

26 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.