Lott v. State of Florida

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the district court’s opinion entered after it had dismissed a complaint under FRCP 41(b) “effectively clarified the ambiguity in its earlier order and ‘rebutted the presumption of finality created by Rule 41(b
• holding that “it is well-established that a Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal is a ‘judgment on the merits’ for res judicata purposes unless the plaintiff is granted leave to amend or the dismissal is reversed on appeal.”
• holding that a lower court's later order \effectively clarified the ambiguity in its earlier order and 'rebutted the presumption of finality created by Rule 41(b)' \ (quoting Knox v. Lichtenstein , 654 F.2d 19 , 22 (8th Cir. 1981) )
• “[R]es judicata can apply to prevent reassertion of dismissed claims, even though there remain live claims in the same litigation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).