DCIDA v. PUC of: PUC

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 district court erred by construing consolidated cases as “the same case” for purposes of the law- of-the-case doctrine
• “[L]aw-of-the-case doctrine is not used to prevent relitigation of the same issues across different cases.”
• “[T]he sole requirement for [law of the case’s] application is that the court must have already ‘actually decided’ the relevant issue.”
• “courts should not reconsider a matter once resolved in a continuing proceeding”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).