Opinion ID: 1348839
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Potential collateral estoppel

Text: Amici curiae in this case also contend a stipulated reversal should be denied whenever a judgment might give rise to collateral estoppel in a future action. Even the Court of Appeal, although it rejected the stipulation, did not rely on this factor. The reason is apparent. The parties in this case agree that no nonparty is or will be affected by the trial court judgment, and nothing in the record suggests otherwise. Collateral estoppel is not an issue in this case. We therefore need not decide, and do not decide, whether potential collateral estoppel should be a factor in deciding whether to depart from the strong presumption in favor of allowing the parties to settle their dispute by seeking a stipulated reversal. (5) The well-established rule is that we should avoid advisory opinions. ( Coleman v. Department of Personnel Administration (1991) 52 Cal.3d 1102, 1126 [278 Cal. Rptr. 346, 805 P.2d 300].)