What is the difference between claim preclusion and issue preclusion?

What is the difference between claim preclusion and issue preclusion?

• A. They are the same doctrine, applying to different contexts.
• B. Claim preclusion bars relitigation of particular issues; issue preclusion bars relitigation of the entire claim.
• C. Claim preclusion bars relitigation of a claim; issue preclusion bars relitigation of particular issues determined in a prior action.
• D. Claim preclusion applies only to criminal cases; issue preclusion applies only to civil cases.

Answer: (C)

In civil procedure, there are two forms of finality that prevent relitigation after a prior decision. Claim preclusion (res judicata) bars a party from relitigating a claim that was decided or could have been raised in a prior action, essentially stopping the entire claim or any related claims from being pursued again. Issue preclusion (collateral estoppel) bars relitigation of specific issues that were actually litigated and essential to the prior judgment, even if the later case involves a different claim. So the main difference is scope: claim preclusion blocks the whole claim, while issue preclusion blocks only particular issues. The other options either swap the scope or misstate the context (criminal vs civil).

In civil procedure, there are two forms of finality that prevent relitigation after a prior decision. Claim preclusion (res judicata) bars a party from relitigating a claim that was decided or could have been raised in a prior action, essentially stopping the entire claim or any related claims from being pursued again. Issue preclusion (collateral estoppel) bars relitigation of specific issues that were actually litigated and essential to the prior judgment, even if the later case involves a different claim. So the main difference is scope: claim preclusion blocks the whole claim, while issue preclusion blocks only particular issues. The other options either swap the scope or misstate the context (criminal vs civil).