This page uses extracted PDF text. Text can misread numbers, dates or table columns. Check the PDF before quoting or interpreting it. Redacted areas remain redacted.
- 5 -
Green v. Diagnostic Imaging Assocs., P.C., 299 Va. 1, 13-14 (2020) (quoting Bill Greever Corp.,
256 Va. at 254). Unpermitted “‘[c]laim-splitting’ is bringing successive suits on the same cause
of action where each suit addresses only a part of the claim.”4 Id. at 13 (quoting Bill Greever
Corp., 256 Va. at 254). And “the rule against claim-splitting” is “enforce[d]” through
application of “the doctrine of res judicata.” Bill Greever Corp., 256 Va. at 254.
That doctrine is set out by Rule 1:6, which provides as follows:
A party whose claim for relief arising from identified conduct, a
transaction, or an occurrence, is decided on the merits by a final
judgment, is forever barred from prosecuting any . . . subsequent
civil action against the same opposing party . . . on any claim or
cause of action that arises from that same conduct, transaction or
occurrence . . . .
Rule 1:6(a); see also Lee v. Spoden, 290 Va. 235, 247-48 (2015) (explaining that applying a res-
judicata bar requires proof that (1) the claim was previously “decided on the merits by a final
judgment,” (2) both the past and current actions are between the same parties, and (3) the
subsequent action “involve[d] the same conduct, transaction[,] or occurrence”).
Res judicata applies “whether or not the legal theory or rights asserted in the . . .
subsequent action were raised in the prior lawsuit.” Rule 1:6(a). It also applies without regard to
“the particular remedies sought” or “the legal elements or the evidence upon which any claims in
the prior proceeding depended.” Id. In other words, “it does not matter that the second suit . . .
would require evidence not present in the first suit.” Funny Guy, LLC v. Lecego, LLC, 293 Va.
135, 150 (2017).
A. Issue and Claim Preclusion
“Res judicata involves both issue and claim preclusion.” Lane, 297 Va. at 653 (quoting
Funny Guy, 293 Va. at 142). Issue preclusion bars “the same parties from ‘[re]litigating in a
4 Of course, parties can waive later application of the rule against claim splitting through
the wording of the contract. See Bill Greever Corp., 256 Va. at 254-56. Jump to an indexed page (12 of 12)