Mitchell v. Emulsified Asphalt Products Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• Late disclosure is harmless “when there is no prejudice to the party entitled to the disclosure”
• “[A] plaintiff is precluded from raising a particular legal theory in a subsequent action even if she was not permitted to assert that particular theory in the first action due to her own dilatory conduct.”
• “The burden to prove substantial justification or harmlessness rests with the dilatory party.”
• “It is well established, under the doctrine of ‘claim splitting,’ that a party cannot avoid the effects of res judicata by splitting her cause of action into separate grounds of recovery and then raising the separate grounds in successive lawsuits.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).