Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/529bv.pdf
Page Number: 547.0

529US2

Unit: $U49

[10-24-00 10:29:50] PAGES PGT: OPIN

472

NELSON v. ADAMS USA, INC.

Opinion of the Court

Our decision surely does not insulate Nelson from liability.
As counsel twice represented at oral argument, see Tr. of
Oral Arg. 9, 19–20, Nelson seeks only the right to contest
on the merits his personal liability for fees originally sought
and awarded solely against OCP. That right, we hold, is just
what due process affords him.5

*

*

*

For the reasons stated, the judgment of the Court of
Appeals is reversed, and the case is remanded for further
proceedings consistent with this opinion.

It is so ordered.

5 Once the amended pleading is served and Nelson’s response is sub-
mitted, it will be open to Adams to urge, as Adams prematurely does here,
Brief for Respondents 22–28, that issue preclusion (collateral estoppel)
bars Nelson from contesting ﬁndings made during the litigation between
OCP and Adams. See Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 39 (1980).
We venture no opinion here about the possible success of such an argu-
ment, made at the proper time.