Peterson v. Temple

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “inequitable result [would] occur” if court applied new rule retrospectively
• stating that claim preclusion prohibited plaintiff from recovering damages for personal injuries arising from an accident where plaintiff had previously litigated property damage arising from the same accident and against the . same party
• stating that claim preclusion prohibited plaintiff from recovering damages for personal injuries arising from an accident where plaintiff 11 had previously litigated property damage arising from the same accident and against the same party
• stating that the terms “cause of action” and “claim” are synonymous
• applying prospectively rule regarding mandatory joinder of claims for personal injury and for property damage arising from particular set of facts
• applying the modern definition of the term “claim,” “it is clear that claims for injury to person and to property arising from the same accident involve but' a single claim”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).