He "held the rule of collateral estoppel, or issue preclusion
, prevented the state from defending the constitutionality of two laws [2011 and 2013] requiring the involvement of a minor's parents before she may obtain an abortion," Johnson reported.
Collateral estoppel, or issue preclusion
, prevents relitigation of a prior issue under a new claim if the prior claim was "actually litigated" and if the determination was "essential to the judgment.
The petitioner, which won a previous trademark opposition against the respondent before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”), argues that the TTAB's decision on the issue of likelihood of confusion is entitled to issue preclusion
effect and that, consequently, the only issues to be decided in its subsequent trademark infringement action against the respondent are (1) whether the respondent ever used the mark shown in its application on the goods recited in its application and (2), if so, the wording of the injunction and the amount of damages to which it is entitled.
101) Also known as issue preclusion
, it is commonly stated that collateral estoppel requires more than that "some question of fact or law in a later suit was relevant to a prior adjudication between the parties.
2010) ("The basic difference between claim preclusion and issue preclusion
is simply put: claim preclusion applies to whole claims, whether litigated or not, whereas issue preclusion
applies to particular issues that have been contested and resolved.
Under the doctrine of collateral estoppel, or issue preclusion
is often referred to as collateral estoppel.
Further, the Cirilli plaintiffs had not identified any errors in or addressed why she should revisit her previous decision not to apply claim and issue preclusion
58) Each time it equated issue preclusion
with collateral estoppel and vice versa.
A broad rule of issue preclusion
, which establishes an outcome for all purposes in all contexts for all times, may produce litigation to the death over that issue in the initial action.
102) The Eighth and Ninth Circuits' rules are equally clear, stating that "[u]npublished opinions are decisions which a court designates for unpublished status" and that "[t]hey are not precedent," (103) and "[u]npublished dispositions and orders of this Court are not precedent, except when relevant under the doctrine of law of the case or rules of claim preclusion or issue preclusion
two distinct doctrines: claim preclusion and issue preclusion