§Why CasetextPricing

In Re: Light Cigarettes Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation

MOTION for Application of the Collateral Estoppel Doctrine with Memorandum of Law

49 Cited authorities

  1. Allen v. McCurry

    449 U.S. 90 (1980)   Cited 5,764 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that under res judicata, parties may not "relitigat[e] issues that were or could have been raised" in a prior action

  2. Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore

    439 U.S. 322 (1979)   Cited 4,238 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

  3. Montana v. United States

    440 U.S. 147 (1979)   Cited 3,591 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "once an issue is actually and necessarily determined by a court of competent jurisdiction, that determination is conclusive in subsequent suits based on a different cause of action involving a party to the prior litigation"

  4. Salve Regina College v. Russell

    499 U.S. 225 (1991)   Cited 1,693 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “a court of appeals should review de novo a district court's determination of state law”

  5. Blonder-Tongue v. University Foundation

    402 U.S. 313 (1971)   Cited 2,222 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding issue preclusion inappropriate when "without fault of his own the [party to be precluded] was deprived of crucial evidence or witnesses in the first litigation"

  6. Curtis v. Loether

    415 U.S. 189 (1974)   Cited 1,081 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Seventh Amendment does apply to actions enforcing newly enacted statutory rights so long as they are "analogous" to those that could have been brought at law in 18th–century England

  7. Lytle v. Household Manufacturing, Inc.

    494 U.S. 545 (1990)   Cited 404 times
    Holding that plaintiff's Seventh Amendment right to trial by jury of his § 1981 claim was infringed where collateral estoppel effect was given to the trial court's adverse findings on his Title VII claim

  8. United States v. Stauffer Chemical Co.

    464 U.S. 165 (1984)   Cited 277 times
    Holding that "the doctrine of mutual defensive collateral estoppel is applicable against the government to preclude relitigation of the same issue already litigated against the same party in another case involving virtually identical facts."

  9. Grella v. Salem Five Cent Sav. Bank

    42 F.3d 26 (1st Cir. 1994)   Cited 460 times
    Holding that "a hearing on a motion for relief from stay is merely a summary proceeding of limited effect," requiring the bankruptcy court to decide only "whether the party seeking relief has a colorable claim to property"

  10. Perez v. Volvo Car Corp.

    247 F.3d 303 (1st Cir. 2001)   Cited 330 times
    Holding that an objection to summary judgment evidence need not take any particular form so long as it is made "seasonably, strenuously, and specifically"

  11. Section 17200 - Unfair competition defined

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200   Cited 17,839 times   315 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting unlawful business practices

  12. Section 1962 - Prohibited activities

    18 U.S.C. § 1962   Cited 15,878 times   60 Legal Analyses
    Specifying prohibited activities

  13. Section 1341 - Frauds and swindles

    18 U.S.C. § 1341   Cited 13,405 times   104 Legal Analyses
    Relating to mail fraud

  14. Section 17500 - Untrue or misleading advertising

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17500   Cited 2,659 times   64 Legal Analyses
    Requiring action that originated in California to effect consumers in another state

  15. Section 1966 - Expedition of actions

    18 U.S.C. § 1966   Cited 8 times

    In any civil action instituted under this chapter by the United States in any district court of the United States, the Attorney General may file with the clerk of such court a certificate stating that in his opinion the case is of general public importance. A copy of that certificate shall be furnished immediately by such clerk to the chief judge or in his absence to the presiding district judge of the district in which such action is pending. Upon receipt of such copy, such judge shall designate

  16. Section 1967 - Evidence

    18 U.S.C. § 1967   Cited 4 times

    In any proceeding ancillary to or in any civil action instituted by the United States under this chapter the proceedings may be open or closed to the public at the discretion of the court after consideration of the rights of affected persons. 18 U.S.C. § 1967 Added Pub. L. 91-452, title IX, §901(a), Oct. 15, 1970, 84 Stat. 944.