| Venue: | SCOTUS |
| Facts: | Officers of the company file materially false and misleading proxy statement in connection with a merger. |
| Posture: | Stockholders' class action in federal district court: damages recission of the merger, recovery of costs. Before trial, the SEC files suit against some of the defendants (essentially the same claims that the plaintiffs have here). There's a trial, verdict for the SEC, affirmed by 2nd Cir. Now motion for partial summary judgment here seeking to estop litigation on issues determined in the SEC action. District court denies the motion, 2nd Cir. reverses saying there has been a full and fair opportunity to litiate. |
| Issue: | Can a litigant who was not a party to a prior judgment use preclusion "offensively," to prevent relitigation of issues previously resolved? |
| Holding: | Yes. |
| Rule: | If there has been a "full and fair" opportunity to litigate the claim, estoppel applies. |
| Reasoning: | The law of estoppel has evolved, and it shapes the scope of the jury's function. 7A right to a jury trial isn't absolute. |
| Dicta: | Rhenquist, dissenting: yeah, but this does violate 7A. |