Van Houten v. Harco Construction, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the analysis of whether a party has been prejudiced involves the same factors relevant to whether a party had a full and fair opportunity to litigate a prior claim, as listed in Hossler
• reviewing de novo WCB’s determination that a party was not collaterally estopped from raising an issue because the question of collateral estoppel did not “involve an interpretation of the [Workers’ Compensation] Act” or “fall within the [WCB’s] traditional area of expertise”
• collateral estoppel must be accorded to administrative proceedings

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).