Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

nonmutual collateral estoppel

Read a random definition: investment tax credit

A quick definition of nonmutual collateral estoppel:

Nonmutual collateral estoppel is a legal term that means if someone was involved in a court case before and lost, they can't bring up the same issue again in a new case. This applies even if the new case is different from the old one. It can be used by someone who wasn't involved in the first case to stop the other person from bringing up the same issue again. It's like saying, "You already lost this argument before, so you can't bring it up again."

A more thorough explanation:

Definition: Nonmutual collateral estoppel is a legal doctrine that prevents a party from relitigating an issue that has already been decided in a previous lawsuit, even if the second lawsuit involves a different claim. This doctrine can be asserted either offensively or defensively by a nonparty to the earlier action to prevent a party from relitigating an issue that was determined against it.

Examples:

  • Defensive collateral estoppel: A defendant in a personal injury lawsuit is sued by the plaintiff for damages resulting from a car accident. The defendant was previously sued by another plaintiff for the same accident and was found not to be at fault. The defendant can assert defensive collateral estoppel to prevent the plaintiff in the current lawsuit from relitigating the issue of fault.
  • Offensive collateral estoppel: A plaintiff sues a company for patent infringement. The company previously litigated the same issue in a different lawsuit and was found to have infringed on the patent. The plaintiff can assert offensive collateral estoppel to prevent the company from relitigating the issue of infringement.

These examples illustrate how nonmutual collateral estoppel can be used to prevent parties from relitigating issues that have already been decided in previous lawsuits. This doctrine helps to promote judicial efficiency and finality of judgments.

nonmovant | nonnavigable

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
18:42
what makes them better candidates than you?
18:43
they all had like 175's and either really strong professor recs or like owned a business
18:43
or other extracurricular stuff
18:43
strong professor recs is BS who cares
18:44
i hope
18:44
they can see when u cancel ur score right
18:44
yeah
18:44
thats so embarrising
18:44
fuck me
18:44
i hope i am remembering it way worse
18:44
lmao yeah i think in most circumstances you shouldn’t cancel cuz they might assume the score is worse than it was
18:45
remembering the lsat?
18:45
yur
18:45
I’ve been doing that too you’ll be fine
18:45
i just saw that some kids a year below me in high school are starting at good ass schools too fuckkk
18:46
what are good ass schools to you?
18:46
do u have a dream school?
18:46
well i saw one is at fordham and one is at upenn and ik fordham isnt t14 but its better than temple and villanova
18:47
dream is duke
18:47
ooh interesting choice why Duke?
18:48
i got into fordham and so did the dumbass I was dating for like two months it’s not that hard
18:48
by which I mean if they let him in I don’t trust their standards
18:49
my dad went to duke law so i have been a fan forever
18:49
Duke is fun. I took a trip there when I was 19 or so. Really good time when I was a young rapscallion.
18:49
and ik i just dont think i gave myself enough time for a guaranteed 170+ performance
18:49
I didnt see if anyone answered my UGA question. Did anyone answer it?
18:53
@Dkkm11: are you not still a young rapscallion?
19:00
Nah, I am gray-bearded wizard.
19:02
Hmmm. I guess that’s okay.
19:03
Honestly, idk what I would call myself these days. Will probably not know until I can reflect on this part of my life which will be idk, in like 5 years when I am 32.
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.