Legal Opinion
Taylor v. Sturgell
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided June 12, 2008No. 07-371PublishedCited by 2,409 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Ginsburg
“It is a principle of general application 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 of process.” Hansberry v. Lee, 311 U. S. 32,40 (1940). Several exceptions, recognized in this Court’s decisions, temper this basic rule. In a class action, for example, a person not named as a party may be bound by a judgment on the merits of the action, if she was adequately represented by a party who actively participated in the litigation. See id., at 41. In this…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- Jones v. BockSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Montana v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Eisen v. Carlisle & JacquelinSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- New Hampshire v. MaineSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2,409 opinions
- Burks v. RaemischCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2009
- Kendale L. Adams v. City of IndianapolisCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2014
- Harris v. County of OrangeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Denise Coleman v. Patrick R. DonahoCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2012
- Estate of Rice Ex Rel. Rice v. Correctional Medical ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2012
2,404 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.