Opinion ID: 2584112
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: The Settled-Law-of-the-Case Doctrine

Text: ¶ 6 The court refuses to be bound here by the settled law of the case. It rejects the doctrine as unjust for application to this litigation. Justice is interposed as the sine qua non of an adjudication's qualification for settled-law effect. ¶ 7 The settled-law-of-the-case doctrine operates to bar relitigation in the same case of issues that were finally decided through an appellate process. [17] The earlier decision on review becomes binding in all subsequent stages of the case. The doctrine not only ensures absolute consistency of later with former issue resolutions, it also guards against abuse of judicial process by preventing relitigation of issues settled in the course of an earlier appellate stage of the case. [18] ¶ 8 I would not loosen one iota the firm grip of control the reviewing process of correction now wields over postremand proceedings whose course stands charted by an appellate disposition; I would firmly and loudly condemn every unauthorized departure from settled law, either in postremand proceedings at nisi prius or in any other review stages that may follow. I would sanction departures from settled law solely for those issues which are determined not to have been fully and fairly litigated. [19]