Chudacoff v. Univ. Med. Ctr. (Summary)

COURT PROCEDURES – CLAIM PRECLUSION

Chudacoff v. Univ. Med. Ctr., No. 11-16232 (9^th Cir. Apr. 18, 2013)

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed a district court’s dismissal of a physician’s case, on the basis of claims preclusion, holding that the lower court erred in its application of preclusion law.  The appeals court held that the claims were not barred by preclusion because they did not arise out of the same general facts as the claims in the first lawsuit.  In fact, most of the facts of the second case arose from events that occurred after the first lawsuit was filed, further indicating the factual differences between the two cases.

Read the prior opinion (now reversed in part).