Verhagen v. Arroyo

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that under Florida law for the purposes of collateral estoppel, an attorney is in privity with his or her client in a previous suit when the opposing party in that action brings a subsequent suit against the attorney based in the same facts
• barring second suit against attorney and law firm who represented the defendants in the underlying conduct litigated during the first suit, finding the attorney and firm “for collateral estoppel purposes, in privity with the defendants” from the first suit
• under Florida law, for purposes of collateral estoppel, attorney is in privity with his client in previous suit when opposing party in that action brings a subsequent suit against attorney based on same facts
• under Florida law, for purposes of collateral estoppel, attorney is in privity with his client in previous suit when opposing party in that action brings a subsequent suit against attorney based on same facts

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).