Claim preclusion requires a final judgment on the merits, identity or privity of parties, and the same claim or cause of action. It bars not only the claims actually litigated but those that could have been raised arising from the same transaction.
It is distinct from issue preclusion, which bars relitigation of specific issues actually decided and necessary to the prior judgment.
Alternative Names:
Claim Preclusion, Bar and Merger
Why it Matters?
Res judicata is most useful against serial filings and against plaintiffs who split claims across forums, including a claimant who litigates one theory and then files a second suit on another arising from the same events. The scope depends on how broadly the jurisdiction defines a cause of action, and transaction-based definitions are considerably more preclusive than narrower ones.
Frequently Confused with
Related terms
Frequently asked questions
Does res judicata bar claims that were never actually litigated?
Does a dismissal without prejudice trigger preclusion?
