Document: 522 U.S. 222118 S.Ct. 657139 L.Ed.2d 580 Kenneth Lee BAKER and Steven Robert Baker, by his next friend, Melissa THOMAS, Petitioners,v.GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION. No. 96-653. Supreme Court of the United States Argued Oct. 15, 1997. Decided Jan. 13, 1998. Syllabus * For fifteen years Ronald Elwell worked for respondent General Motors Corporation (GM), he was assigned to a group that studied performance GM vehicles. Elwell's studies research concentrated on vehicular fires, frequently aided lawyers defending against product liability actions. The Elwell-GM employment relationship soured in 1987, agreed retire after serving as consultant two years. Disagreement surfaced again when retirement time neared continued into 1991. That year, plaintiffs Georgia action deposed Elwell. case involved pickup truck fuel tank burst flames just collision. Over GM's objection, testified truck's system inferior competing products. This testimony differed markedly from had given in-house expert witness. A month later, sued Michigan county court, alleging wrongful discharge other tort contract claims. counterclaimed, contending breached fiduciary duty GM. In settlement, paid an undisclosed sum money, parties stipulated entry permanent injunction barring testifying witness any litigation involving without consent, but providing "shall not operate interfere with jurisdiction . [where still pending]. '' (Emphasis added.) addition, entered separate settlement agreement, which provided would institute contempt or breach-of-contract proceedings giving subpoenaed another court tribunal. Thereafter, Bakers, petitioners here, testify their GM, commenced Missouri state removed federal Bakers alleged faulty pump caused vehicle fire killed mother. asserted barred testimony. After camera review District allowed depose call him at trial, stating alternative grounds its ruling: (1) Michigan's need be enforced because blocking violate Missouri's "public policy,'' shielded disclosure only privileged otherwise confidential information; (2) could modified Michigan, so elsewhere modify decree. they were awarded $11.3 million damages. Eighth Circuit reversed, ruling, inter alia, should have been admitted. Assuming, arguendo, existence public policy exception full faith credit command, concluded erroneously relied favoring relevant, nonprivileged information, has "equally strong favor credit.'' also determined evidence insufficient show Held: may offense national command. Pp. ___-___. (a) animating purpose Constitution's Full Faith Credit Clause "was alter status several states independent foreign sovereignties, each free ignore obligations created under laws judicial others, make them integral parts single nation throughout remedy upon obligation might demanded right, irrespective origin.'' Milwaukee County v. M.E. White Co., 296 268, 277, 56 229, 234, 80 L.Ed. 220. As judgments, is exacting. final judgment one State, if rendered adjudicatory authority over subject matter persons governed judgment, qualifies recognition land. See, e.g., Matsushita Elec. Industrial Co. Epstein, 516 367, 373, 116 873, 877, 134 6. guided forum State's policy'' determining law applicable controversy, see Nevada Hall, 440 410, 421-424, 99 1182, 1188-1190, 59 416, this Court's decisions support no roving exception'' due see, Estin Estin, 334 541, 546, 68 1213, 1217, 92 1561. assuming ubiquitous permitting State resist another's Bakers' misread precedent. Further, never placed equity decrees outside domain. Equity payment money long considered equivalent judgments entitled nationwide recognition. Barber Barber, 323 77, 65 137, 89 82. There reason why preclusive effects adjudication those "in privity'' them, i.e., claim preclusion issue preclusion, differ depending solely type relief sought civil action. Cf., id., 87, S.Ct., 141-142 (Jackson, J., concurring). credit, however, does mean enforcement measures must travel sister do; such remain even-handed control law. See McElmoyle ex rel. Bailey Cohen, 13 Pet. 312, 325, 10 177. Orders commanding inaction denied purported accomplish official act within exclusive province interfered ordering authority. Fall Eastin, 215 1, 30 3, 54 65. (b) With these background principles view, turns dimensions order relies stop asks: What matters did legitimately conclude? Although between cannot reach beyond controversy brought States, parties, asserting claims merits considered. power basis become intervenors dispute. Martin Wilks, 490 755, 761-763, 109 2180, 2184-2185, 104 835. Most essentially, although decree preclude volunteering jurisdiction, cannot, entering stipulated, dictate relevant case-a foreign-shall inadmissible. conclusion creates general surely permit refuse honor based forum's choice preferences. simply recognizes, that, mechanisms enforcing do itself purposes Credit, automatically transfer title land similarly determine evidentiary issues lawsuit who court. Cf. Nixon, 418 683, 710, 94 3090, 3108-3109, 41 1039. language consent decree, excluding scope then-pending action, informative. If court's ban would, same way, courts similar cases. recognized interference potential agreeing elsewhere. ruled out resort telling, injunctions are ordinarily enjoining surrogate 86 F.3d 811 (C.A.8 1996), reversed remanded. GINSBURG, delivered opinion Court, REHNQUIST, C.J., STEVENS, SOUTER, BREYER, JJ., joined. SCALIA, filed concurring judgment. KENNEDY, O'CONNOR Laurence H. Tribe, Cambridge, MA, petitioners. Paul T. Cappuccio, Washington, DC, respondent. Justice GINSBURG Court. 1 concerns witness' shall heard States. counterclaims precipitated Elwell, former (GM) engineering analyst, injunction. prohibited "testifying, prior written [GM], kind already filed, future, [GM] owner, seller, manufacturer and/or designer separately agreed, ordered tribunal, actionable violation GM-Elwell agreement. 2 case. question presented whether command bars We hold requirement. 3 Two lawsuits, initiated different states, gave rise before us. One suit severed relationship, other, wrongful-death complaint. describe turn. 4 APH0HSThe Suit Between 5 employee 1959 until 1989. years, beginning 1971, Engineering Analysis Group, vehicles, most particularly vehicles litigation. fires. He assisted improving products suggesting changes line designs. During course employment, engaged Beginning soured. first negotiated agreement When came retire, disagreement 6 May 1991, pending deposition, objection counsel Specifically, times defended safety crashworthiness pickup's system. On deposition comparison 7 disclosing information misappropriating documents. response motion preliminary injunction, hearing, trial November 22, enjoined 8 "consulting discussing person Corporation's trade secrets[,] attorney-client work relating manner [to be] future received, knowledge of, entrusted during employments Corporation.'' Corp., 91-115946NZ (Wayne Cty.) (Order Granting Part, Denying Part Injunctive Relief, pp. 1-2), App. 9-10. 9 August 1992, received money. jointly both stipulation agreed-upon proposed contained proscriptions. substantially repeated terms injunction; second comprehensively Corporation, either witness, kind, consulting attorneys agents product(s) issue.'' Order Dismissing Plaintiff's Complaint Permanent Injunction Cty., p. 2, Aug. 26, 1992), 30. 11 To encompassing bar, made exception: " [This provision] pending].'' Ibid. (emphasis added). No noninterference provision appears further precisely tendered parties.1 12 then pending, included more limitation. tribunal testify, way'' agreement: ""It [Elwell's] appearance testimony, any, hearings Motions quash subpoena proceeding, orders, will way form Agreement.''' Settlement Agreement, 10, quoted 811, 820, n. 1996). 14 six since (pursuant injunction) jurisdictions testify. 15 16 Having described termination litigation, we summarize complaint underlying decedent, Beverly Garner, front-seat passenger 1985 Chevrolet S-10 Blazer February 1990 highway accident. Blazer's engine caught fire, driver died. September Garner's sons, death parties' diverse citizenship. merits, neither nor cause collision impact injuries alone death. 17 trial. objected deponent ground response, urged override noted ordered, 18 Federal Responding stated 19 At defect contributed postcollision fire. identified 1973 internal memorandum bearing risk fuel-fed Following jury damages, jury's verdict. 20 Appeals 818-819, credit,'' 819. 21 819-820. observed "has asked occasions [but] yet so,'' intend block cases like Bakers', "the unnecessary.'' Id., 820. 22 granted certiorari decide requirement stops obtaining 520 ----, 117 1310, 137 474 (1997).2 II 23 provides: 24 "Full Acts, Records, Proceedings every State. And Congress Laws prescribe Manner Records proved, Effect thereof.'' Const., Art. IV, §1.3 25 Pursuant Clause, prescribed: 26 "Such records copies thereof, authenticated, Territories Possessions usage Territory Possession taken.'' 28 U.S.C. §1738.4 27 explained 220 (1935), 234. 29 1561 (1948) (the "substituted earlier comity thus basically altered sovereigns''). Our precedent differentiates owed (legislative common law) judgments. "In numerous held required entertain founded.'' County, U.S., compel "a substitute statutes own dealing concerning it competent legislate.'' Pacific Employers Ins. Accident Comm'n, 306 493, 501, 629, 632, 83 940 (1939); Phillips Petroleum Shutts, 472 797, 105 2965, 2977-2978, 628 (1985). Regarding (res judicata) purposes,5 words, rendering gains force. 878, (1996); Kremer Chemical Constr. 456 461, 485, 102 1883, 1899, 72 262 (1982); Reese & Johnson, Scope Judgments, 49 Colum. L.Rev. 153 (1949). 31 controversy. 416 (1979).6 But our 1217 (Full "ordered submission even hostile policies reflected practical operation system, Constitution designed, it.''); Fauntleroy Lum, 210 230, 237, 641, 643, 52 1039 (1908) (judgment Mississippi rested misapprehension law). supra, __, "The clause provisions incorporated framers transforming aggregation independent, sovereign nation.'' Sherrer Sherrer, 343, 355, 1087, 1092-1093, 1429 (1948). "aware [no] considerations local rightly deemed impair force effect Act require [a money] rendition.'' Magnolia Hunt, 320 430, 438, 64 208, 213, 88 149 (1943). 32 82 (1944) (unconditional petitioner's right recover credit); A. Ehrenzweig, Conflict §51, 182 (rev. ed.1962) (describing "indefensible'' old doctrine "merge'' qualify recognition). judicata collateral estoppel),7 concurring) implementing statute speak "judgments'' ""judicial proceedings' limitation''); Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. (providing "one known "civil action,''' lieu discretely labeled actions suits equity). 33 adopt practices regarding time, manner, Enforcement 177 (1839) "laws [of forum] permit''); Restatement (Second) §99 (1969) ("The determines methods enforced.'').8 34 Thus, ownership ineffective title, (1909), indeed preclusively adjudicate rights running Robertson Howard, 229 254, 261, 854, 856, 57 1174 (1913) (" [I]t doubted proper defendant convey property situated State.''). antisuit elsewhere, compatible process direction constraining Cole Cunningham, 133 107, 269, 538 (1890), fact controlled James Grand Trunk Western R. Ill.2d 356, 372, 152 N.E.2d 858, 867 (1958); E. Scoles P. Hay, §24.21, 981 (2d ed.1992) (observing "does address, on, [in forum]'').9 Sanctions violations event, generally administered issued Stiller Hardman, 324 F.2d 626, (C.A.2 1963) (nonrendition enforces monetary portion leaves injunctive rendition forum). B 35 turn take up question: 36 recounted, __-__, submitted presiding judge signed.10 While joined, expressly litigated, proceeding,11 related "merged judgment,'' sue more. Parklane Hosiery Shore, 439 322, 326, 5, 645, 649, 58 552 (1979) ("Under res judicata, privies action.''); Judgments §17 (1980). Similarly, counterclaim Michigan. §23, Comment a, 194 ("A interposes is, substance, plaintiff, far concerned, plaintiff defendant.''). 37 835 (1989). lacks precluding strangers themselves what witnesses admissible search truth. Laws, §§137-139 (1969 rev.1988) (forum's governs competence evidence); cf. Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale Dist. Southern Iowa, 482 522, 544, 29, 107 2542, 2556, 96 461 (1987), (foreign "blocking statute'' certain "do[es] deprive American party produce [the information]''); First Nat'l City Bank, 396 897 1968) (New York bank German branch, though doing 38 recognized, Cert. 26a-27a. Rather, recognize (1839); §99, (1974) [E]xceptions demand man's lightly expansively construed, derogation truth.'').12 39 informative regard. Excluding permission, provides Georgia.'' Injunction, 2), order, extended case, "interfer[ed] jurisdiction'' "interfere Georgia. 40 render vulnerable F.3d, 815, 11. regarded merely concession "some fail extend [Michigan] injunction.'' explained, courtroom displace determination admit exclude it. light, altruism find telling __. sum, shield jurisdiction's causes governance. Recognition, dispositions order. obedience resolve. Thomas Washington Gas Light 448 282-283, 100 2647, 2661, 757 (1980) (plurality opinion) ("Full [a] tribunal] make; parity reasoning, determinations make.''). 42 ** 43 reasons stated, remanded consistent opinion. 44 It ordered. 45 46 I agree sister-state do. Ante, established execution it.'' (1839). recite principle 47 enforce obliged preventing presenting than holding contempt. ""did domestic all intents purposes, validity, faith, evidence. can new tribunals States.''' Thompson Whitman, Wall. 457, 462-463, (1873) added) (quoting J. Story, §609). sure, (or defense one) another. 48 "establish rule evidence, rather jurisdiction. record notice conclusive adjudged, affect rendered, offered recovered Union, proved government, national, country respect being reexaminable impeachable fraud having parties.'' Wisconsin Pelican 127 265, 291-292, 1370, 1375, 239 (1888) (citation omitted). obtained ""does carry it, efficacy persons, execution. give there; executed latter permit.''' Lynde Lynde, 181 183, 187, 555, 556, 810 (1901) McElmoyle, 325). Watts Waddle, 389, 392, 437 (1832), obtain conveyance land, duplicating 50 Because requires execute concur 51 whom Justices THOMAS join, my view well-settled majority's analysis unnecessary and, respect, problematic some degree. explains approach. 53 majority, course, correct rendition. forbids questioning grounds. little doubt proposition. often contravenes 544-546, 1216-1217, (1948); 354-355, (1943); Williams North Carolina, 317 287, 294-295, 63 207, 210-212, 87 279 (1942); (1908). My concern principle, proceeds disregard announcing broad exceptions. First, majority allow issuing decline "purport[ing] sister] State.'' Second, basic said cover "interfer[ing] authority.'' exceptions recognizes rejection accord rules Clause. employed resolve furthermore, disrupting ought us considerable pause. 55 careful foreclose types place ambit credit. These authorities seem disregarded today's holding. example, chooses discuss extent jurisdictions. proven quite difficult. Some uphold affecting territorial reach. E.g., State''); Carpenter Strange, 141 105-106, 960, 966, 640 (1891); Muller Dows, 444, 449, 207 (1876); Massie Watts, Cranch 148, (1810). 11A Charles Alan Wright, Arthur Miller, Mary Kay Kane, Practice Procedure §2945, 98-102 ed.1995); §102, d (1969); Reese, Foreign Decrees, Iowa 199-200 (1957). Nor undertaken today announce denies interferes 116-117, 272, (1890); Simon 236 115, 122, 255, 257, 492 (1915); Baltimore Ohio Kepner, 314 44, 51-52, 62 6, 9-10, (1941); Donovan Dallas, 377 408, 415-418, 84 1579, 1583-1585, 409 (1964) (Harlan, dissenting). 198 ("the occasion practice ignoring injunctions] credit''). matter, there among courts. Schopler, Extraterritorial propriety counterinjunction against, 74 A.L.R.2d 831-834, §§3-4 (1960 Supp.1986). Subjects once fundamental delicate addressed necessarily requiring discussion, caution lest sound later application. Restatement, c valid orders enjoins act''); §24.9, 964 (noting interstate divorce uncertainty''). hold, raises issue, intrude essential processes narrow circumstances, define here. Even qualification where procedural institutional aspects, discussion provide sufficient guidance how construed light precedents. articulate rationale conclusions. absence elaboration, unclear about particular here renders undeserving reliance unidentified justify omitting doctrine's application decision uneasy tension following example illustrates uncertainty surrounding Suppose anticipated appeared litigate character elicit. Assume privilege effect, relitigate point, control. Perhaps argument made, say, integrity demands allowing relitigation issue; but, below, confront interesting question. exception. direct "requires emerged.'' 466, 1889, accord, Parsons Steel, Inc. Alabama 518, 525, 106 768, 772-773, 877 (1986); Marrese Academy Orthopaedic Surgeons, 470 380-381, 384, 1327, 1331-1332, 1334, 274 (1985); Migra Warren School Bd. Ed., 465 75, 81, 892, 896, 79 (1984); Haring Prosise, 462 306, 313, 103 2368, 2373, 76 595 (1983); Allen McCurry, 449 90, 96, 101 411, 415-416, 66 308 Through doctrines speaking generally, part jurisprudence Riley New Trust 315 349, 608, 612, 885 (1942). enforceable terms, effects. supra; Edward Cooper, §4467, 635 (1981). us, pays scant attention circumstance, becomes critical. point recent cases, step analysis. 375, Marrese, 381-382, 1332-1333; Haring, 314, 2373-2374; Kremer, 466-467, 1889-1890. "If greater efficacy' §1738.'' Union Planters' Bank Memphis, 189 71, 604, 606, 712 (1903)); 1334. ends inquiry, making 383, 386, 1333, 1334-1335. inquire state-law questions inquiry obviate extensions 8, 2374, 8. 60 undoubted gives resolved. Here arguments seemed embrace assumption apply Bakers. appear assumption. 61 simple proceedings, nothing indicates novel assertion binds estoppel law, ""the opportunity mutuality estoppel.''' Nummer Treasury Dept., Mich. 534, 542, 533 N.W.2d 250, 253 Storey Meijer, Inc., 431 368, 429 169, 171, (1988)), cert. denied, 964, 418, 335 (1995). "Although trend modern abolish mutuality, reaffirmed commitment 1971 [Howell Vito's Trucking Excavating 386 37, 191 313]. Mutuality remains Lichon Universal 435 427-428, 459 288, 298 (1990) (footnote Since presented, treat bound cites contrary. makes difference twice rejected relying small Bacon Walden, 186 139, 144, N.W. 1061, 1063 (1915) ("Defendant injunctive] affected it''); Detroit Ry., 11, 95 992, 993 (1903) [T]he answer contention circuit [prior controlling present''). suggests intended bind third 820 question, legal including authoritative rulings highest parties. 1889-1890; Matsushita, 878. refused reconsider instead litigants return sheds substance construing issue. King Commercial Travelers America, 333 153, 160-161, 488, 492-493, 608 Commissioner Estate Bosch, 387 456, 464-465, 1776, 1782-1783, 886 (1967). moreover, declined base They 2.613(B), directs wishing present Brief Respondent 10. 2.613(B) concerns, rule. reflects itself, resources best preserved proceedings. rule, binding virtue Sun Oil Wortman, 486 717, 722, 108 2117, 2122, 743 (1988) [A] litigated courts''). used Baker Eccles 242 394, 403, 152, 155-156, (1917) ("And assume resident confines come borders submit personal receiving residence futile attempt territory''). Under burden persuasion rests raising defense. Qualls, 434 340, 357-358, 454 374, 383 (1990); E G Finance Simms, 362 592, 596, 911, 914 (1961). contrary authority, conclude carried showing prohibiting testifying. result surprise. unlikely proceeding 480-481, 1897 ("We previously judicially "full fair opportunity' issue''). 67 inconsistent disavows desire claiming "bound' Elwell.'' 39. difficult accept assessing look effect. 765, 2186 (1989); cf., 413, 1582 prohibition itself''); Oklahoma Packing 309 4, 9, 215, 218, 537 (1940) ("That restraint formally directed immaterial''). Despite disclaimer, seeks litigating admissibility Furthermore, essentially irrelevant dispute, flawed terms. seek anything; party. events, threshold eliminates applies equitable suffices reasons, syllabus constitutes prepared Reporter Decisions convenience reader. Timber Lumber 200 321, 337, 282, 499. conducted hearing stage, presided stage conflict Circuit, many lower permitted non-trade-secret matters. Addendum Petitioners (citing cases). Predating Constitution, Articles Confederation order: records, acts magistrates Confederation, IV. concise history Jackson, Credit-The Lawyer's (1945). enacted original 1790. 1790, ch. Stat. 122 (codified amended §1738) authenticated aforesaid, whence taken.''). text revised then, remained constant. Res judicata'' term traditionally discrete effects: now (a precludes it), §§17-19 called "collateral estoppel'' (an actually resolved subsequent claim), §27. use plain English estoppel, 894, (1984). Paulsen Sovern, "Public Policy'' 969, 980-981 (1956) traditional dubious obscure "an [own] applied [controversy] it''). 5; (1981) (Although directly [it] judgment.''). interdistrict registration recovery property. §1963 (upon registration, district registered manner''). procedure effective widespread adoption Revised Uniform Act, U.L.A. (1964). (Supp.1997) (Table) (listing adoptions Columbia). impermissible enjoin (1964), maintaining Ginsburg, Search Credit: Last-in-Time Conflicting Harv. 798, 823 (1957) (urging issue], dismissal whose prosecution enjoined,'' "would goes another''). dealt have, main, ambit. 823, 99; 828-829 current [an antisuit] compelling deference state, reasonable compromise extreme alternatives,'' courts,'' denying states''). emphasizes key factor warranting inability assure steer clear gained protected communications. 28-29; (contending "is pervasively uncontrollably leavened Motors' information''). assert, object attorney-client, attorney-work product, secrets privilege. 9. observed, invoked participate adjudication. Blonder-Tongue Laboratories University Ill. Foundation, 402 329, 91 1434, 1443, 788 (1971); Hansberry Lee, 311 32, 40, 117, 85 (1940). KENNEDY obvious noting post, __-__. Such observation misses thrust argument. readily acknowledges commonplace personam party.'' 35. But, adds, Bakers; only. forcibly, insists constitutionally interest anyone's rights.''). Given argument, principles, standing alone, presents. inexplicably reads sweeping processes.'' Post, endeavored plain, impermissibly KENNEDY's hypothetical, ibid., mark. precluded relitigating Missouri. Cromwell Sac, 351, 354, 195 (1876) [D]etermination ''); 5.

Category: 10