explaining that law of the case, not collateral estoppel, is appropriate where the decision with preclusive effect had not finally disposed of the litigation between the parties
How later courts described this case
- explaining that law of the case, not collateral estoppel, is appropriate where the decision with preclusive effect had not finally disposed of the litigation between the parties
- discussing factors a court considers in applying the law of the case doctrine
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No. 2:19-cv-10360-RGK-PLA Date January 16, 2024
Title Global Master International Group, Inc. v. Esmond Natural, Inc., et al.
Present: The Honorable R. GARY KLAUSNER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Joseph Remigio Not Reported N/A
Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Tape No.
Attorneys Present for Plaintiff: Attorneys Present for Defendants:
Not Present Not Present
Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) Order to Show Cause Why Motion for Judgment on the
Pleadings [DE 198] Should Not Be Granted Under Law of the Case
On December 22, 2023, Defendants filed a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, arguing that
collateral estoppel precludes relitigating the same issues underlying Plaintiff's RICO claim already
litigated and decided during the 2021 jury trial over Plaintiff's fraud and breach of contract claims.
Having reviewed the parties’ briefings and the applicable law, it appears collateral estoppel does
not apply, although the doctrine of the law of the case does apply. See United States v. Park Place
Assocs., Ltd., 563 F.3d 907, 925 n.11 (9th Cir. 2009) (explaining that law of the case, not collateral
estoppel, is appropriate where the decision with preclusive effect had not finally disposed of the
litigation between the parties). Under this doctrine, “a court is ordinarily precluded from reexamining an
issue previously decided by the same court.” Old Person v. Brown, 312 F.3d 1036, 1039 (9th Cir. 2002)
(quoting Richardson v. United States, 841 F.2d 993, 996 (9th Cir. 1988)); see also United States v.
Alexander, 106 F.3d 874, 876 (9th Cir. 1997) (discussing factors a court considers in applying the law of
the case doctrine).
Accordingly, the Court ORDERS the parties to show cause in writing as to whether the Motion
should be granted under the doctrine of the law of the case. Such a response shall not exceed five pages
and must be submitted within two days of this Order’s issuance.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Initials of Preparer JRE/de
CV-90 (06/04) CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Page 1 of 1