Which doctrine bars a later action on the same claim after a final judgment on the merits between the same parties?

Which doctrine bars a later action on the same claim after a final judgment on the merits between the same parties?

• A. Claim preclusion
• B. Issue preclusion
• C. Quasi in rem
• D. Rule 60(b) relief

Answer: (A)

Claim preclusion, also known as res judicata, bars a later action on the same claim after a final judgment on the merits between the same parties. Once a court resolves a claim on its merits and issues a final judgment, the parties cannot relitigate that same claim in a subsequent action. The doctrine relies on three essential elements: a final judgment on the merits in a prior action, identity of the parties or their privies in both actions, and the same claim or cause of action being at stake in both suits (or a claim arising from the same transaction or core facts). When these are met, the later suit is barred to conserve judicial resources and provide finality. This differs from issue preclusion, which bars relitigation of specific issues actually litigated and essential to the prior judgment, even if the later case involves a different claim. It also differs from quasi in rem, which concerns jurisdiction and rights to property, and from Rule 60(b) relief, which is about granting relief from a judgment under certain extraordinary circumstances rather than preventing a new suit on the same claim.

Claim preclusion, also known as res judicata, bars a later action on the same claim after a final judgment on the merits between the same parties. Once a court resolves a claim on its merits and issues a final judgment, the parties cannot relitigate that same claim in a subsequent action. The doctrine relies on three essential elements: a final judgment on the merits in a prior action, identity of the parties or their privies in both actions, and the same claim or cause of action being at stake in both suits (or a claim arising from the same transaction or core facts). When these are met, the later suit is barred to conserve judicial resources and provide finality.

This differs from issue preclusion, which bars relitigation of specific issues actually litigated and essential to the prior judgment, even if the later case involves a different claim. It also differs from quasi in rem, which concerns jurisdiction and rights to property, and from Rule 60(b) relief, which is about granting relief from a judgment under certain extraordinary circumstances rather than preventing a new suit on the same claim.