State v. Maddox (Slip Opinion)

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that employer is not precluded from relitigating issues determined in unemployment compensation proceedings because of the brevity of those proceedings
• finding issues not identical where Corresponding issues in two cases differed because one involved subjective inquiry Sid the other an objective inquiry
• finding preclusive effect given to issue of the defendant’s state of mind where the issue was determined, although it need not have been, in-an earlier action
• considering applicability of offensive collateral estoppel to unemployment compensation decision but concluding issues involved were not identical
• holding an unemployment benefits hearing does not preclude a breach of contract claim because the administrative proceedings were informal and the defendant’s stake in the action was small in comparison to the present breach of contract action
• finding that “[i]f the conditions for preclusion are otherwise met, [a] final order of an administrative agency in an adjudicatory proceeding ... precludes re-litigation of the same issues between the same parties, just as would a final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).