436 Pa. Super. 411 - Shaffer v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[A] plea of collateral estoppel is valid if, 1) the issue decided in the prior adjudication was identical with the one presented in the later action, 2) there was a final judgment on the merits, 3) the party against whom the plea is asserted was a party or in privity with a party to the prior adjudication, 4) the party against whom it is asserted has had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue in question in a prior action.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Shaffer v. Smith

2. “It is generally accepted in th[is] Commonwealth. . .that a criminal conviction collaterally estops the defendant from denying his acts in a subsequent civil trial. The doctrine of ‘collateral estop-pel’ or issue preclusion prevents a question of law or an issue of fact that has been litigated and fully adjudicated in a court of competent jurisdiction from being relitigated in a subsequent suit.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2003 Pa. Super. 272 - Columbia Medical Group, Inc. v. Herring & Roll, P.C.

3. “The rules of res judicata are applicable only when a final judgment is rendered. However, for purposes of issue preclusion (as distinguished from merger and bar), “final judgment” includes any prior adjudication of an issue in another action that is determined to be sufficiently firm to be accorded conclusive effect.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Shaffer v. Smith