River Park, Inc. v. City of Highland Park

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that dismissal of plaintiff’s federal civil rights action barred subsequent state tort claims that could have been asserted in federal court under supplemental jurisdiction rule
• holding that the parallels between factual allegations in the plaintiff’s state and federal complaints were “the most telling indication of identity of cause of action” in the case
• holding that for purposes of res judicata, separate claims will be considered the same cause of action if they arise from a single group of operative facts, regardless of whether they assert different theories of relief
• holding that for purposes of res judicata , separate claims will be considered the same cause of action if they arise from a single group of operative facts, regardless of whether they assert different theories of relief.
• noting that the “most telling indication of identity of cause of action” was the parallels between factual allegations in the state complaint and federal complaint
• noting that our adoption of the transactional test to determine whether identity of causes of action exists for purposes of res judicata is consistent with “the trend of decisions in other jurisdictions”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).