Which statement about claim preclusion is correct?

Which statement about claim preclusion is correct?

• A. Issue Preclusion Bars New Issues In Separate Proceedings.
• B. Claim Preclusion Bars Claims Arising From The Same Transaction That Were Litigated Or Could Have Been Litigated.
• C. Both Claim And Issue Preclusion Apply Only To Federal Questions.
• D. Claim Preclusion Allows Relitigation Of The Same Claim In A Later Suit.

Answer: (B)

Claim preclusion, also known as res judicata, means you can’t relitigate a claim after a court has entered a final judgment on the merits in a prior action if the new claim arises from the same transaction or series of connected events and could have been brought in that earlier action. That straightaway explains why the correct statement says claim preclusion bars claims arising from the same transaction that were litigated or could have been litigated. Think of it this way: once a claim has been resolved, a second lawsuit can't rehash the same dispute, because the opportunity to present all related arguments in a single proceeding has already happened. Issue preclusion, by contrast, concerns preventing relitigation of specific issues actually litigated and decided in the prior case, not new issues—so saying it bars new issues is inaccurate. Preclusion rules aren’t limited to federal questions; they apply across both federal and state contexts with respect to how judgments bar later claims or issues. Finally, the idea that you can relitigate the same claim in a later suit is precisely what claim preclusion prevents.

Claim preclusion, also known as res judicata, means you can’t relitigate a claim after a court has entered a final judgment on the merits in a prior action if the new claim arises from the same transaction or series of connected events and could have been brought in that earlier action. That straightaway explains why the correct statement says claim preclusion bars claims arising from the same transaction that were litigated or could have been litigated.

Think of it this way: once a claim has been resolved, a second lawsuit can't rehash the same dispute, because the opportunity to present all related arguments in a single proceeding has already happened. Issue preclusion, by contrast, concerns preventing relitigation of specific issues actually litigated and decided in the prior case, not new issues—so saying it bars new issues is inaccurate. Preclusion rules aren’t limited to federal questions; they apply across both federal and state contexts with respect to how judgments bar later claims or issues. Finally, the idea that you can relitigate the same claim in a later suit is precisely what claim preclusion prevents.