Legal Opinion

DeNardo v. Calista Corp.

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided April 22, 2005No. S-11183PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

EASTAUGH, Justice.

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff filed three state and federal lawsuits against his former employer. After the first two actions were dismissed, the superior court dismissed his third, holding it was barred by res judicata and the judicial policy against claim splitting. Plaintiff appeals. Because the stipulated terms of the dismissal in the first state court action preserved the plaintiffs non-federal claims, neither res ju-dicata nor the doctrine against claim splitting bars the third action. We therefore vacate the dismissal order in the third action and remand for further…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Castro v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
  3. Breck v. UlmerAlaska Supreme Court · 1987
  4. Peterson v. EkAlaska Supreme Court · 2004
  5. Wessells v. State, Department of HighwaysAlaska Supreme Court · 1977

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Smith v. CSK Auto, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 2009
  2. Smith v. CSK Auto, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 2006
  3. Mitchell v. MitchellAlaska Supreme Court · 2016
  4. Harrod v. State, Dept. of RevenueAlaska Supreme Court · 2011
  5. Wright v. AndingAlaska Supreme Court · 2017

22 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