Res Judicata (Claim Preclusion)

173 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Alcan Aluminum Corp.
  990 F.2d 711· 2d Cir.· 1993-04-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a party can avoid CERCLA liability if it demonstrates its pollutants did not contribute to the release or response costs, or only contributed to a divisible portion of the harm, and that CERCLA does not impose a minimum concentration requirement for hazardous
• Woods v. Dunlop Tire Corp.
  972 F.2d 36· 2d Cir.· 1992-08-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a Title VII claim is barred by res judicata if it arises from the same transaction as a prior lawsuit and could have been raised, even if administrative proceedings were pending.
• Greenberg v. The Bd. OF Governors OF THE Fed. Reserve Sys.
  968 F.2d 164· 2d Cir.· 1992-06-19 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the Board of Governors' order prohibiting the Greenbergs from participating in federally supervised financial institutions, finding no bias, no bar by prior settlements, and sufficient evidence of misconduct.
• W. Sys., Inc. v. Ulloa
  958 F.2d 864· 9th Cir.· 1992-03-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the relitigation exception to the Anti-Injunction Act permits enjoining state court proceedings barred by res judicata, not just issues actually litigated, and that sanctions for vexatious litigation require an appropriate hearing.
• Elwin E. Aliff v. JOY Mfg. Co.
  914 F.2d 39· 4th Cir.· 1990-09-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff's CERCLA claim was barred by res judicata because it arose from the same transaction as the prior fraud claim and could have been brought in the first suit. The court also held that the denial of a new trial was proper as the evidence was discove
• Charles Koen & Assocs. v. City OF Cairo & Allen Moss
  909 F.2d 992· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-03 ·cited 4×
  Federal courts must give state court judgments the same preclusive effect as they have in the state's own courts, barring claims that were or could have been litigated.
• Alpert's Newspaper Delivery Inc. v. THE NEW York Times Co.
  876 F.2d 266· 2d Cir.· 1989-05-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Metropolitan Routedealers Association's (MRA) substantial involvement in a prior lawsuit (Belfiore) and the current action created sufficient identity of parties to apply res judicata and collateral estoppel, barring relitigation of most claims.
• The Realex Chem. Corp. v. S.C. Johnson & SON, Inc.
  849 F.2d 299· 8th Cir.· 1988-06-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the settlement agreement unambiguously waived Johnson's claims regarding the Wasp & Hornet label once Realex made the agreed-upon changes, but that the House & Garden label claim was not barred by res judicata.
• Jackson v. United States Postal Serv.
  799 F.2d 1018· 5th Cir.· 1986-09-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the claim for rental value was barred by res judicata, and the claim for attorneys' fees was untimely.
• Martin-Trigona v. United States
  779 F.2d 72· D.C. Cir.· 1985-12-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant's motions for leave to file complaints were properly denied because he failed to comply with the terms of a prior injunction.
• Blanchard Importing & Distrib. Co., Inc. v. Societe E. Blanchard et Fils
  402 F.2d 797· C.C.P.A.· 1968-11-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that prior adjudication of likelihood of confusion and priority of use in a civil action is binding in a subsequent proceeding to cancel a Supplemental Register registration, even if the prior adjudication involved Principal Register registrations.
• The AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Hase
  390 F.2d 151· 8th Cir.· 1968-03-05 ·cited 4×
  An insurer is collaterally estopped from asserting policy exclusions if it refused to defend the insured in the underlying action where the insured's status (e.g., statutory employee) was implicitly or explicitly determined.
• Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida v. United States
  722 F. Supp. 2d 1293· S.D. Fla.· 2010-07-12 ·cited 3×
  The court granted summary judgment for the defendants, finding no genuine issue of material fact regarding the tribe's equal protection claim.
• Town OF Deerfield v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  992 F.2d 420· 2d Cir.· 1993-04-27 ·cited 3×
  The FCC order preempting Deerfield's zoning ordinance is reversed because the FCC cannot disregard prior federal and state court judgments that already decided the preemption issue between the same parties.
• In re Graham v. Internal Revenue Serv.
  973 F.2d 1089· 3d Cir.· 1992-08-24 ·cited 3×
  The court held that claim and issue preclusion do not bar the bankruptcy court from determining the dischargeability of taxes and fraud penalties, and that the burden of proof for fraud exceptions to discharge is by a preponderance of the evidence.
• Vitaline Corp. v. Gen. Mills, Inc.
  891 F.2d 273· Fed. Cir.· 1989-12-07 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) appropriately granted summary judgment for General Mills based on claim preclusion and violation of Trademark Rule 2.114(b)(2)(i).
• Tuma v. Dade Cnty. Pub. Schs.
  989 F. Supp. 1471· S.D. Fla.· 1998-01-06 ·cited 2×
  A prior state court decision affirming the dismissal of an employee for insubordination, which considered and rejected the employee's claim of religious discrimination, collaterally estops the employee from relitigating the discrimination claim in federal court under Title VII an
• Cameron v. Tomes
  990 F.2d 14· 1st Cir.· 1993-03-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while the state has a Due Process obligation to limit the worsening of a detainee's mental condition, the district court's injunction requiring administrators to follow medical professionals' judgment needed clarification regarding the balance of security and
• Lolling v. Patterson
  966 F.2d 230· 7th Cir.· 1992-06-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Deputy Lolling's due process claims were barred because his suspension was a random and unauthorized act for which the state provided adequate post-deprivation remedies, and his retaliation claim was barred by res judicata as he had a full and fair opportunity
• Bray v. NEW York Life Ins.
  851 F.2d 60· 2d Cir.· 1988-06-28 ·cited 2×
  A state court dismissal of a petition for review on statute of limitations grounds, which New York law treats as a dismissal on the merits, has preclusive effect in federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1738, barring subsequent federal claims.
• Jeno F. Paulucci and Lois Paulucci v. City OF Duluth & Lake Superior Paper Indus.
  826 F.2d 780· 8th Cir.· 1987-08-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for voluntary dismissal, nor did it err in granting summary judgment based on res judicata and collateral estoppel.
• Pasterczyk v. Fair
  819 F.2d 12· 1st Cir.· 1987-05-29 ·cited 2×
  A prior state court judgment for declaratory and injunctive relief, which granted sentence credit, has res judicata effect and bars a subsequent federal § 1983 damages action for the same underlying grievance, as the damages claim could have been raised in the state action.
• Fla. Transp. Serv., Inc. v. Miami-Dade Cnty.
  543 F. Supp. 2d 1315· S.D. Fla.· 2008-04-07 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the County's stevedore permit ordinance, as applied, violates the dormant Commerce Clause for permit denials in 2003, 2004, and 2005, entitling Florida Transportation to summary judgment on liability for those claims.
• The Fund FOR Animals, Inc. v. Lujan
  962 F.2d 1391· 9th Cir.· 1992-04-29 ·cited 1×
  The Eleventh Amendment bars the Fund's MEPA claims against state defendants, and federal involvement is insufficient to enjoin state defendants for NEPA violations. The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying preliminary injunctive relief.
• Antoine Abou Rouphael v. Khamisi
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-10-29
  The court held that res judicata does not bar claims for breaches of contract occurring after a prior lawsuit was dismissed, but that it lacked personal jurisdiction over one defendant due to insufficient minimum contacts with Florida.
• Harding v. Transunion LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-11-18
  The court held that plaintiff's claims against Upstart were barred by claim preclusion due to a prior arbitration, and claims against reporting agencies were barred by issue preclusion regarding the underlying account inaccuracies.
• Burnside v. Aramark Corp.
  N.D. Fla.· 2024-10-11
  The court held that the plaintiff's civil rights complaint is barred by res judicata due to a prior dismissed action and should also be dismissed as malicious for failing to truthfully disclose his litigation history on the complaint form.
• Noshirvan v. Couture
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-08-02
  The court held that the defendant's counterclaim was barred by res judicata and that sanctions were warranted against the defendant's counsel for filing a frivolous pleading.
• Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. DOE
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-02-21
  The court held that its prior dismissal order was clearly erroneous because the prior cases involved different copyrighted works and defendants, thus claim preclusion did not apply.
• Supreme Fuels Trading FZE v. Sargeant, III
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-09-19
  The court held that the defendant's motion to dismiss based on res judicata, election of remedies, statute of limitations, laches, and failure to state a claim was denied, allowing the alter ego claim to proceed.
• Local Access, LLC v. Kelley Drye & Warren LLP
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-09-08
  The court denied defendants' motions to dismiss, finding that plaintiffs sufficiently stated claims for trade secret misappropriation and that the litigation privilege and res judicata did not bar the action at this stage, but dismissed TCA claims as shotgun pleading.
• Bostick v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-07-13
  The court affirmed the Commissioner's decision, finding that the ALJ applied correct legal standards and the decision was supported by substantial evidence.
• United States v. Williams
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-06-16
  The court granted summary judgment for the United States, holding that federal tax liens attach to all of Williams' property, including the Sanibel Property, and that Williams owes the assessed tax liabilities, penalties, and interest.
• Restivo v. Pennachio
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-09-20
  The court held that claims based on alleged fraudulent trademark filings in 2018 and 2019 survive dismissal, while claims related to the original 2013 registration are barred by res judicata. Infringement and breach of contract claims also survive.
• THE Republic of Ecuador v. Dassum
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2022-08-03
  A prior final determination in an Ecuadorian bankruptcy proceeding that debts were fully satisfied bars subsequent litigation of the same debt through res judicata and collateral estoppel.
• Fernandez v. Yordalys Cruz
  341 So. 3d 410· Fla. 3d DCA· 2022-06-01
  The appellate court reversed summary judgments against a child seeking to establish a constructive trust, finding that neither res judicata nor collateral estoppel barred her claims. The court held that the child, not being a party to the prior quiet title action and having litig
• Fernandez v. Yordalys Cruz
  341 So. 3d 410· Fla. 3d DCA· 2022-06-01
  A child appealed summary judgments granted in favor of her mother that barred the child's constructive trust claims based on res judicata and collateral estoppel from a prior quiet title action. The child was not a party to the prior action, and the court held that neither doctri
• MSP Recovery Claims Series 44, LLC v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n (USAA)
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-05-17
  The court held that claims based on Exhibits A and B are dismissed, and plaintiffs' claims are limited to the specific Exemplars, but the Second Amended Complaint survives dismissal on those grounds.
• Harper v. Heather Hills Amenities, LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-03-21
  The district court affirmed the bankruptcy court's dismissal, holding that the Lot Owners' claims were barred by res judicata and equitable mootness, and that their statutory claim under § 712.12 failed.
• Dweck v. City of Miami Springs
  S.D. Fla.· 2021-11-10
  The court granted the motion to dismiss, finding it lacked subject matter jurisdiction and that the claims were barred by res judicata.
• Clements v. Apax P'rs LLP
  M.D. Fla.· 2021-05-10
  The court denied the plaintiff's motion for reconsideration, finding no error in its prior dismissal of claims based on claim preclusion.
• Clements v. Apax P'rs LLP
  M.D. Fla.· 2021-03-16
  The court held that claims against 3M, Attenti, and Roman were barred by res judicata, but dismissed Apax for lack of personal jurisdiction, granting plaintiff leave to amend as to Apax. The court denied a motion for Rule 11 sanctions.
• BC Power, Inc. v. Stuart C. Irby Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2020-03-31
  The Court granted the defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings, finding the plaintiff's claims barred by res judicata and collateral estoppel due to prior litigation.
• Brown v. Fla. Gulf Coast Univ. Bd. of Trs.
  M.D. Fla.· 2019-11-21
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims were barred by res judicata, and claims against an individual defendant were barred by sovereign immunity or Title IX limitations.
• JXB 84 LLC v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Tr.
  S.D. Fla.· 2019-09-25
  The court held that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, res judicata, and collateral estoppel barred the appellant's claims because they were or could have been litigated in the prior state court foreclosure action.
• Whittington v. Civil Action No. 2291-VCP Dragon Grp. L.L.C.
  Del. Ch.· 2011-04-15
  The court held that Frank is a member of Dragon Group, LLC, with an ownership interest equivalent to 146 shares out of 776 total shares, or 18.81%. Frank is entitled to a payment of $162,175.10 plus prejudgment interest, and an accounting to determine his proportionate share of a
• Rameses, Inc. v. Cnty. of Orange
  481 F. Supp. 2d 1305· M.D. Fla.· 2007-04-06
  The court granted in part and denied in part both parties' motions for summary judgment, finding some claims ripe and others barred by res judicata, and determining the appropriate standard of review for First Amendment challenges.
• In & for New Castle Cnty. Javier Quereguan v. Civil Action No. 20298-NC NEW Castle Cnty.
  Del. Ch.· 2006-04-24
  The Court denied the State's motion to dismiss the Third-Party Complaint and the County's motion for summary judgment. The Court found that the State implicitly waived sovereign immunity by authorizing the Department of Administrative Services to enter into lease agreements, and
• Olmsted v. Defosset
  205 F. Supp. 2d 1316· M.D. Fla.· 2002-06-05
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a prima facie case for disability discrimination under the ADA but sufficiently alleged retaliation. The court also dismissed claims against Heritage Consultants for failure to name it in the EEOC charge and because it is not a co
• Hadsock v. Bush
  180 F. Supp. 2d 1321· S.D. Fla.· 2001-12-04
  The court held that the Eleventh Amendment does not bar claims under the Medicaid Act but does bar claims under the Adoption and Safe Families Act due to its detailed remedial scheme. The court also found that Younger abstention did not apply.