Nahar v. Awan

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “privity is a flexible concept dependent on the particular relationship between the parties in each individual set of cases”
• holding that “a dismissal on statute of limitations 19 grounds” qualifies as a “judgment on the merits” for claim preclusion
• determining that an 15 “identity of claims exists when two suits arise from the same transactional nucleus of 16 facts”
• stating that “imaginative” parties may not “avoid preclusion by 12 attaching a different legal label to an issue that has, or could have, been litigated”
• stating that “an imaginative attorney may [not] avoid preclusion by attaching a different legal label to an issue that has, or could have, been litigated”
• explaining that “imaginative” parties may not “avoid preclusion by attaching a different legal label to an issue that has, or could have, been litigated”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).