Maka v. Musial

How courts have described this case

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

• discussing that claim preclusion bars subsequent actions when the claim involves the same parties, same claim, and there is a final judgment
• explaining that for issue preclusion to operate the “issue decided in the prior litigation” must be “identical to the issue presented in the present action”
• issue preclusion applies only when “the issue decided in the prior litigation was identical to the issue presented in the present action”
• “The doctrine of res judicata covers both claim preclusion (true res judicata) and issue preclusion (collateral estoppel).”
• Claim preclusion “bars a subsequent action between the same parties upon the same claim or upon claims relating to the same cause of action . . . which might have been made.”
• “Claim preclusion bars a subsequent action between the same parties upon the same claim or upon claims ‘relating to the same cause of action . . . which might have been made.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).