How To Prove A Florida Res Judicata (Claim Preclusion) Defense

 

 

In Florida, a defense of Res Judicata (Claim Preclusion) is defined as:

Claim preclusion, also known as res judicata, bars a person from re-litigating a claim or cause of action where the same claim has been litigated on its merits by the same parties, and a final decision has been rendered by a court.

It simply means:

One party can’t sue another twice for the same claim.

There are 4 elements of the defense:

• Element 1. There was an earlier proceeding that ended in a final judgment. Res Judicata means that if a court has already made a final decision on a case, the same issue cannot be brought up again in a new lawsuit, ensuring that disputes are settled once and for all to avoid repeated litigation.
  

  Facts that might support this element look like:

  * The earlier proceeding involved the same parties and was adjudicated in a court of competent jurisdiction.
  * A final judgment was issued in the earlier case, resolving all claims between the parties.
  * The final judgment from the earlier proceeding was not appealed and is therefore conclusive.
  * The issues in the earlier proceeding were fully litigated and determined by the court.
  * The earlier case was decided on its merits, establishing a binding resolution for the current dispute.

• Element 2. The judgment was on the merits of the case. The judgment was based on the actual facts and issues of the case, meaning the court made a decision after fully considering the evidence and arguments, which prevents the same parties from relitigating those issues in the future.
  

  Facts that might support this element look like:

  * The court conducted a full trial, allowing both parties to present evidence and arguments regarding the claims at issue.
  * The judge issued a detailed written opinion outlining the factual findings and legal conclusions that formed the basis of the judgment.
  * The parties engaged in extensive discovery, indicating that the case was thoroughly examined before the judgment was rendered.
  * The judgment explicitly addressed the substantive issues raised in the complaint, demonstrating that the merits were considered.
  * The final ruling was based on the application of law to the facts presented, confirming that the decision was made on the merits.

• Element 3. The judgment was in a court of competent jurisdiction. The judgment must come from a court that has the authority to make legal decisions on the case, meaning it is recognized as having the power to rule on the issues involved, which is essential for the principle of Res Judicata to apply.
  

  Facts that might support this element look like:

  * The judgment was issued by a state court that has the authority to hear the type of case presented.
  * The court where the judgment was rendered had proper subject matter jurisdiction over the dispute.
  * The parties involved in the case were given proper notice and an opportunity to be heard in the court.
  * The judgment was made by a judge who was duly appointed and had the legal capacity to preside over the case.
  * The case was not dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, confirming the court’s competence to issue the judgment.

• Element 4. The earlier proceeding involved the same parties or their privies and the same cause of action. This means that the previous case was between the same people or their close associates and dealt with the same issue, so it can’t be tried again in court.
  

  Facts that might support this element look like:

  * The plaintiff in the current case is the same individual who initiated the earlier proceeding against the defendant.
  * The defendant in the current case is the same entity that was named in the previous lawsuit filed by the plaintiff.
  * Both the earlier proceeding and the current case arise from the same set of facts and circumstances surrounding the disputed contract.
  * The claims made in the earlier proceeding were directly related to the same issues being litigated in the current case.
  * A final judgment was rendered in the earlier proceeding, addressing the same legal rights and obligations of the parties involved.

^{(See Dade Engineering Corp. v. C. Hunt Enterprises, Inc., 972 So. 2d 1096 (Fla. Court of Appeals 2008). Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Douglas, 110 So. 3d 419 – Fla: Supreme Court 2013.)}
If you’re representing yourself in court and plan to assert a Defense of Res Judicata (Claim Preclusion), having a Personal Practice of Law at Courtroom5 is essential. You’ll need to make informed decisions about what to file at each phase of your case and prepare legal documents that are supported by thorough legal research and a strong analysis of the facts. Equip yourself with the tools and knowledge necessary to effectively present your Defense of Res Judicata.

Prove Your FL Res Judicata (Claim Preclusion) Defense

U.S. Civil Cases Only