Clarke v. Redeker’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

14 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““To the extent, if any, that these issues were not decided in the first Clarke case, they are matters that might have, and should have been there determined. ‘The law of res judicata as it relates to claim preclusion is firmly established. In a subsequent action by the same parties, a judgment on the merits in a former action based upon the same cause of action precludes relief on the grounds of res judicata. The judgment is conclusive, not only as to matters which were decided, but also as to all matters which might have been decided. Tait v. Western Md. Ry. Co., 289 U.S. 620, 623 , 53 S.Ct. 706 , 77 L.Ed. 1405 ; Baltimore S. S. Co. v. Phillips, 274 U.S. 316 , 47 S.Ct. 600 , 71 L.Ed. 1069 ; Cromwell v. County of Sac, 94 U.S. 351, 352 , 24 L.Ed. 195 ; Guettel v. United States, 8 Cir., 95 F.2d 229, 230 , 118 A.L.R. 1060 .’ Englehardt (Engelhardt) v. Bell & Howell Co., 327 F.2d 30 (8th Cir. 1964). “Inasmuch as the Court finds that the plaintiff is here suing on the same cause of action as was adjudicated in Clarke v. Redeker, 259 F.Supp. 117 (S.D.Iowa 1966), this action should be dismissed as precluded on the grounds of res judicata.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 301 F. Supp. 1256 - Purdes v. Carvel Hall, Inc.