Opinion ID: 3168117
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Overview of Iowa Law.

Text: 1. Introduction. The proper scope of the doctrine of res judicata has been a traditional source of controversy in American law. At the risk of oversimplification, the dispute has centered on broad or narrow application of the doctrine. See Edward W. Clearly, Res Judicata Reexamined, 57 Yale L.J. 339, 339–42 (1948) (discussing the differences between the traditional narrower view and the broader transactional approach). The general question in the debate is how broadly a “claim” or “cause of action” should be defined. Id. at 340–41. As a general matter, the law has shown an ambivalence toward the doctrine. As noted by the leading historic advocate of the broad transactional approach to res judicata, Judge Clarke, in a dissenting opinion before the adoption of the Restatement (Second) of Judgments, “The defense of res judicata is universally respected, but actually not very well liked.” Riordan v. Ferguson, 147 F.2d 983, 988 (2d Cir. 1945) (Clarke, J., dissenting). We have historically adopted a fairly narrow view of the doctrine of