McFadden v. McFADDEN

How courts have described this case

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

• “existence of privity must depend upon a finding that the first action provided substantial protection of the rights and interests of the non-party.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Pennington v. Snow
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1970-07-02· cited 41×
• Matter of Herbert M. Dowsett Trust
  Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals· 1990-05-04· cited 32×
• Moore v. Hafeeza
  New Jersey Superior Court App Division· 1986-07-29· cited 31×
• Spearing v. County of Bayfield
  Court of Appeals of Wisconsin· 1986-08-12· cited 11×
• Bloomfield v. Weakland
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2004-06-16· cited 11×
• Zuckerman v. Tatarian
  Supreme Court of Rhode Island· 1972-06-08· cited 3×
• Voyager Life Insurance v. Caldwell
  S.D. Mississippi· 2005-01-11· cited 1×

Cites

1 case in this archive is cited by this case.

• Wolff v. Du Puis
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1963-01-30· cited 57×