Morris A. Hicks, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated v. The Quaker Oats Company

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 second Restatement rule is “especially appropriate in the case of offensive collateral estoppel, where the problems of assuring a rigorous determination of all grounds of decision are magnified”
• interpreting Montana to provide for issue preclusion even where the facts in the second case are slightly different
• noting the “general rule” adopted in comment 0 that “if a judgment is appealed, collateral estoppel only works as to those issues specifically passed upon by the appellate court”
• stressing “the importance of fairness in the particular circumstances of a given case when a litigant sought to invoke offensive collateral estoppel”
• refusing to afford unappealed alternate grounds of decision offensive collateral estoppel effect
• noting the “general rule” adopted in comment o that “if a judgment is appealed, collateral estoppel only works as to those issues specifically passed upon by the appellate court”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).