§Why CasetextPricing

Galvan v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems et al

Supplemental BRIEF re Motion for Summary Judgment, ;

5 Cited authorities

  1. Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore

    439 U.S. 322 (1979)   Cited 4,269 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that district courts have discretion to refuse to apply offensive non-mutual collateral estoppel against a defendant if such an application of the doctrine would be unfair

  2. Steen v. John Hancock Life Insurance Company

    106 F.3d 904 (9th Cir. 1997)   Cited 101 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that issue preclusion applies to issues decided by this Court in an unpublished decision

  3. Kamilche Co. v. U.S.

    53 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. 1995)   Cited 53 times
    Holding "[c]ollateral estoppel, or issue preclusion, bars the litigation of issues actually adjudicated in previous litigation between the same parties"

  4. Clark v. Clark

    80 Nev. 52 (Nev. 1964)   Cited 31 times
    In Clark v. Clark, 80 Nev. 52, 56, 389 P.2d 69 (1964), this court stated: "On the other hand, collateral estoppel (estoppel by record) may apply even though the causes of action are substantially different, if the same fact issue is presented."

  5. Rule 5 - Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 5   Cited 22,753 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system