Texas-Book-Gun Law Armed And Educated - Flipbook - Page 403
Joseph’s lawsuit against Patrick for medical bills, physical
impairment, pain, and suffering is a civil action. Joseph will very
likely be allowed to use the finding of Patrick’s guilt in the criminal
case (because it used the higher standard of beyond a reasonable
doubt) to help establish his burden in the civil case that Patrick
owes him monetary damages. This is an example of collateral
estoppel; Patrick will not be permitted to re-litigate his guilt in
the civil case because the criminal court already found him guilty
beyond a reasonable doubt.
Both collateral estoppel and res judicata are based on the concept
that a party to a legal proceeding should not be able to endlessly
litigate issues that have already been decided by the legal system.
At its most basic level, it means that a party to a legal proceeding
who receives a final ruling on a particular issue, win or lose, cannot
attempt to have another trial court or even the same court decide
the same issue.
Note about appeals: collateral estoppel and res judicata are different
concepts than an appeal, or asking the court in the first proceeding
to reconsider its ruling or grant a new trial. An appeal is a request to
a higher court to review the decision of a lower court. Likewise, in
any given case, the parties will have numerous opportunities to ask
the current court to reconsider its rulings, or even ask for a new trial
after a trial is completed. Collateral estoppel and res judicata come
into play after a final judgment or ruling that is no longer subject to
appeal or revision by the trial court.
EXAMPLE:
Emily is sued for accidentally shooting Nancy. Nancy wins a
judgment of $350 against Emily, much less than Nancy believed
she was damaged.
392 | CHAPTER SIXTEEN
