Issue preclusion is the term currently preferred for a concept previously called collateral estoppel; and claim preclusion is the term currently preferred for res judicata. Bravo-Fernandez v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, ___ n. 1, ___________ (2016). In Bravo-Fernandez, the Court described the related terms of issue and claim preclusion as follows (internal quotations and additions omitted):
• Issue preclusion: “In criminal prosecutions, as in civil litigation, the issue-preclusion principle means that “when an issue of ultimate fact has once been determined by a valid and final judgment, that issue cannot again be litigated between the same parties in any future lawsuit.”
• Claim preclusion: “instructs that a final judgment on the merits forecloses successive litigation of the very same claim.”
Tuesday, November 29, 2016
Revised Terminology: Issue Preclusion Rather than Collateral Estoppel and Claim Preclusion Rather than Res Judicata (11/29/16)
I have just read the decision in Bravo-Fernandez v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, ___ n. 1, ___________ (2016), here, which was decided today. Based upon that decision I have modified the book at several points to use the terms issue preclusion instead of collateral estoppel and claim preclusion instead of res judicata. The following is a goodnote I have added to discuss that change.