State v. Young

How courts have described this case

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

• this is because, as noted above, the third prong of the collateral estoppel test in Montana inquires into whether the party against whom preclusion is sought was a party, or in privity with a party in the prior proceeding, and CWIC does not fit into that categorization

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Haines Pipeline Construction, Inc. v. Montana Power Co.
  Montana Supreme Court· 1994-06-20· cited 48×
• Holtman v. 4-G's Plumbing & Heating, Inc.
  Montana Supreme Court· 1994-04-05· cited 41×
• Unnamed case
  Ninth Circuit· 2001-04-02· cited 18×
• Fadness v. Cody
  Montana Supreme Court· 1997-12-30· cited 15×
• Troutt v. Colorado Western Insurance
  Ninth Circuit· 2001-04-02· cited 1×

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. McLain
  Montana Supreme Court· 1991-07-16· cited 20×
• Anderson v. State
  Montana Supreme Court· 1991-09-24· cited 16×
• Boyd v. First Interstate Bank of Kalispell, N.A.
  Montana Supreme Court· 1992-05-28· cited 16×