Court Opinion

ID: 9714976
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 05:50:35.408906+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:14:07.725035
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE COOK, specially concurring: I concur fully in the majority opinion. I respectfully suggest, however, that the supreme court reconsider its statement that “[f]or purposes of applying the doctrine of collateral estoppel, finality requires that the potential for appellate review must have been exhausted.” Ballweg, 114 Ill. 2d at 113, 499 N.E.2d at 1375. The case which Ballweg cites for that proposition appears to deal with law of the case, not with res judicata. The rule in most jurisdictions appears to be to the contrary. See Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 13, Comment f, at 135, and Comment /, Reporter’s Note, at 140 (1982). We should not tolerate inconsistent judgments even if the appeal in the first case has not yet been decided. Remedies are available if the first judgment is subsequently reversed. See Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 16 (1982).