Main Content

Greiner Civil Procedure Version 02

Cromwell v. County of Sac

This is an issue preclusion case.  As discussed in the introductory preclusion reading (from the Subrin et al. casebook), there are three or four (depending on the jurisdiction) elements of issue preclusion:  same issue, actually litigated, necessary to the decision, and (perhaps) mutuality.  Which of these elements is at issue in this case?  Do some of the elements bleed into each other?

Also:  why doesn't claim preclusion preclude this lawsuit?