Which doctrine precludes relitigating an issue that was actually litigated and necessarily decided in a prior final judgment?

Which doctrine precludes relitigating an issue that was actually litigated and necessarily decided in a prior final judgment?

• A. Collateral estoppel
• B. Res judicata
• C. Laches
• D. Rescission

Answer: (A)

Collateral estoppel, or issue preclusion, stops you from relitigating a specific issue that was actually litigated, the issue was necessarily decided, and there is a final judgment on the merits. The key idea is not about blocking an entire claim, but about preventing rearguing that particular point because it was already resolved and essential to the prior judgment. This differs from res judicata, which bars bringing an entire claim (or causes of action) that could have been raised in a prior action. Laches is about undue delay in filing, and rescission is about undoing a contract; neither addresses precluding relitigation of a specific issue from a prior final ruling.

Collateral estoppel, or issue preclusion, stops you from relitigating a specific issue that was actually litigated, the issue was necessarily decided, and there is a final judgment on the merits. The key idea is not about blocking an entire claim, but about preventing rearguing that particular point because it was already resolved and essential to the prior judgment. This differs from res judicata, which bars bringing an entire claim (or causes of action) that could have been raised in a prior action. Laches is about undue delay in filing, and rescission is about undoing a contract; neither addresses precluding relitigation of a specific issue from a prior final ruling.