Legal Opinion

Henry E. & Nancy Horton Bartels Trust ex rel. Cornell University v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided July 1, 2009No. 03-2526TPublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

BLOCK, Judge.

This tax ease presents two issues. The first is one of first impression1 in this court: the extent to which collateral estoppel applies when the party to be precluded is alleged to have been “virtually represented” in the prior case by a different party alleging the same legal or factual interests. The doctrine of “virtual representation” is an .exception to the general rule in Anglo-American jurisprudence “that one is not bound by a judgment in personam in a litigation in which he is not designated as a party or to which he has not been made a party by service…

2Cases cited58 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Foman v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  5. Montana v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979

53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Wolfchild v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011
  2. Wolfchild v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2010
  3. Anaheim Gardens v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2012
  4. XXIII Capital Limited v. Decade, S.A.C., LLCDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2024

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API