California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Loubar, LLC v. U.S. Bank, N.A., H040422 (Cal. App. 2016):
The trial court did not need to rely on common law principles of res judicata. Nor do we. (Morenhout v. Higuera (1867) 32 Cal. 289, 295 (Morenhout).) In Morenhout, the court found it "unnecessary to notice the argument of counsel for the plaintiffs as to the force and effect of a former judgment between the same parties and their privies at common law." (Ibid.) The court explained that "[t]o do so, in the presence of the plain and positive provisions of the statute by which the whole matter is regulated, which require no reference to the common law for the purposes of interpretation, would be to go aside and discuss principles which have no direct application to the case. The force and effect of a final judgment in an action for partition is clearly and explicitly stated in the statute . . . ." (Ibid.)
Page 21
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.