Skip to main content

Reilly v. Reid

Citations

  • 45 N.Y.2d 24
  • 379 N.E.2d 172
  • 407 N.Y.S.2d 645
  • 1978 N.Y. LEXIS 2067

How courts have described this case

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

  • observing that “[i]n properly seeking to deny a litigant two ‘days in court[,’] courts must be careful not to deprive him of one”
  • mandating that application of the res judicata doctrine is appropriate “when the two causes of action have such a measure of identity that a different judgment in the second [action] would destroy or impair rights or interests established by the first [action].”
  • now § 24 of Restatement (Seoond) of Law of Judgments (1982) 37
  • “But even if there are variations in the facts alleged, or different relief is sought, the separately stated ‘causes of action’ may nevertheless be grounded on the same gravamen of the wrong upon which the action is brought.”
  • describing New York’s “transactional” approach to claim preclusion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Breitel

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

333 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Reilly v. Reid

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.