Legal Opinion · Dissent

Gonzalez v. Gonzalez

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided April 13, 1982No. 81-1199Published

1DissentFerguson, Judge

The majority refuses to apply collateral estoppel to the facts of this case, holding that the doctrine requires that there be a mutuality of parties in both actions,4 and *99further that the parties in both actions must be adversaries.5 This seems to be the law in Florida as developed in the District Courts of Appeal. However, in this case the law has been mechanically misapplied and perfectly illustrates the proverbial collision of reason and an abstract rule. I dissent because I believe reason should prevail.

Both Stephen and Lawrence brought suit against the United States government in federal…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Parklane Hosiery Co. v. ShoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University of Illinois FoundationSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  3. Bernhard v. Bank of America National Trust & Saving AssociationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  4. Houdaille Industries, Inc. v. EdwardsSupreme Court of Florida · 1979
  5. Triplett v. LowellSupreme Court of the United States · 1936

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

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

Powered by the Exa API