Court Opinion

ID: 9578073
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 21:41:12.752672+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:22:35.112674
License: Public Domain

HENDERSON, Justice
(specially concurring).
Essentially, plaintiff slept on his rights and now seeks to bring an independent action to attack a judgment entered twenty-one months earlier which was adverse to him. Nelson failed to develop testimony and evidence at the first trial detailing his alleged damages.' Now, in an independent equitable action, he seeks to do so by developing new evidentiary facts. Nelson wants to go into the pig loss but he had an opportunity to do this in prior litigation and did not do so.
When a party fails to fully develop all of the issues and evidence available in a case, he is not justified in later trying the omitted issues or facts in a second action based upon the same claim. Cory v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 159 F.2d 391, 392 (3rd Cir.1947).
A party, having suffered an adverse determination and having litigated the ultimate issue, cannot thereafter produce new evidentiary facts to obtain a different determination. He has had his day in court. See 18 Wright, Miller & Cooper, Federal Practice and Procedure: Jurisdiction § 4416, at 141 n. 20 (1981).