McDonald v. Cason’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Under federal precepts, “claim preclusion” or “true res judicata” treats a judgment, once rendered, as a full measure of relief to be accorded between the same parties on the same “claim” or “cause of action.” When the plaintiff obtains a judgment in his favor, his claim “merges” in the judgment; he may seek no further relief on the claim in a separate action. Conversely, when a judgment is rendered for a defendant, the plaintiffs claim is extinguished; the judgment then acts as a “bar.” Under these rules of claim preclusion, the effect of a judgment extends to the litigation of all issues relevant to the same claim between the same parties, whether or not raised at trial. Kaspar Wire Works, Inc. v. Leco Eng’g & Mach., 575 F.2d 530 (5th Cir.1978). Restatement (Second) of Judgments §§ 18-20 (1982).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 824 So. 2d 485 - Barnett v. Nichols