Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
An Intent-Based Approach To The Acceptance Of Benefits Doctrine In The Federal Courts, Benson K. Friedman
An Intent-Based Approach To The Acceptance Of Benefits Doctrine In The Federal Courts, Benson K. Friedman
Michigan Law Review
This Note discusses the question of when federal courts should allow a party who accepts payment of a judgment subsequently to appeal the deficiency of the award. Part I examines the discrepancies currently existing in the acceptance of benefits doctrine as applied by the federal courts. Part II analogizes this issue to the law of implied-in-fact contracts and argues that accepting the benefits of a judgment should not prevent an appeal unless circumstances clearly indicate a mutual intent to settle all claims and thereby terminate litigation. Part III contends that, under the doctrine expressed in Erie Railroad v. Tompkins, …
Collateral Estoppel And Supreme Court Disposition Of Moot Cases, Michigan Law Review
Collateral Estoppel And Supreme Court Disposition Of Moot Cases, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
In response to the Government's novel proposal in Velsicol, this Note reconsiders the procedures by which the Supreme Court could dispose of moot cases. Section I examines the collateral estoppel effects of the Supreme Court's present procedure and the Government's proposal in Velsicol. Section II concludes that both procedures afford excessive protection from collateral estoppel because they misconceive the purpose of Supreme Court review. The Note suggests that, when faced with a moot federal petition for certiorari, the Supreme Court should either deny the petition or, if certiorari has already been granted, dismiss the case.
Collateral Estoppel: Loosening The Mutuality Rule In Tax Litigation, Michigan Law Review
Collateral Estoppel: Loosening The Mutuality Rule In Tax Litigation, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
Collateral estoppel is an aspect of the doctrine of res judicata that precludes relitigation of issues previously adjudicated. A judgment in a prior action may be held conclusive as to issues in a subsequent case. even though the later case technically involves a different cause of action. The rule of collateral estoppel seeks to conserve judicial energy, promote confidence in the judicial system, avoid litigant expense, promote community peace and reliance on judgments, and minimize inconsistent results. Countervailing policy concerns are the right of each person to have his day in court, the fear of increased litigation, the danger of …