305 Ill. App. Plaintiffs argue that defendant's counterclaim is barred by either the statute of limitations or the doctrine of res judicata . Defendant counters that the plain language of section 13-204 allows it to bring this counterclaim. In instances where an underlying action has been filed by a claimant, no action for contribution or indemnity may be commenced more than 2 years after the party seeking contribution or indemnity has been served with process in the underlying action or more than 2 years from the time the party, or his or her privy, knew or should reasonably have known of an act or omission giving rise to the action for contribution or indemnity, whichever period expires later. We first address plaintiffs' argument that because the dismissal of defendant's initial contribution claim, identical to the current one, was an adjudication on the merits in the previous lawsuit, defendant cannot revive the counterclaim in the refiled cause of action.
Plaintiffs essentially argue that the principles of res judicata bar the counterclaim.
Res judicata bars the refiling of an action previously adjudicated on the merits that involves the same parties and the same cause of action. 134 Ill. 2d R. 273. Courts have found that a trial judge's decision to grant a motion to dismiss a cause of action based on the application of a statute of limitation constitutes a final adjudication on the merits. 242 Ill. App. In this case, the trial court granted plaintiffs' motion to dismiss defendant's counterclaim in the previously filed suit pursuant to section 2-619 as barred under the statute of limitations and found no just reason to delay enforcement and appeal of the dismissal order.