Defenses: Claims Preclusion and Res Judicata in Gibson v. Hicks, COA, Pub. 7/27/2012

The doctrine of res judicata stands for the principle that once the rights of the parties have been fully determined, litigation should end. It is an affirmative defense which operates to bar repetitious suits involving the same cause of action. The doctrine is comprised of two subparts: claim preclusion and issue preclusion.

Coomer v. CSX Transp., Inc., 319 S.W.3d 366, 371 (Ky. 2010) (internal footnotes and quotations omitted).

To apply, claim preclusion requires an identity of the parties and causes of action and a resolution on the merits. Id. Issue preclusion prevents a party from relitigating an issue “actually litigated and finally decided in an earlier action.” Buis v. Elliot, 142 S.W.3d 137, 140 (Ky. 2004) (quoting Yeoman v. Commonwealth, Health Policy Bd., 983 S.W.2d 459, 465 (Ky. 1998). “[D]ecisions of administrative agencies acting in a judicial capacity are entitled to the same res judicata effect as a judgment of a court.” Godbey v. University Hospital of the Albert B. Chandler Medical Center, Inc., 975 S.W.2d 104, 105 (Ky.App. 1998).

From Gibson v. Hicks, COA,Pub., 7/27/2012

Please note: I reserve the right to delete comments that are inappropriate, offensive or off-topic.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.