I first came across the application of collateral estoppel in a case decided by the 11th Circuit in Daniel Kordash v USA. They affirmed the decision from the District court by finding that the four elements necessary to apply collateral estoppel were present. One case they cited was Miller’s Ale House Inc. v Boynton Carolina Ale House (LLC, 702 F.3d 1312) which I mention because the court battle there was so very interesting, and set a precedent for this one. Kordash is a fascinating case, and I learned so much from it in its entirety. The opinions in the District court and then the Circuit affirmation are very long, but I highly recommend law students read them. There was clearly a difference in the level of experience and expertise among the lawyers. I believe that Kordash could have avoided collateral estoppel with it’s affirmative result and having his issue precluded. The end of the road for him, and certainly not the outcome he had fought for. He tried very hard, along with his team(s) but I think that his appeal was doomed by his lawyers in the district court. This case was for council well versed in (avoiding, or applying) issue preclusion, and, on this side of the aisle, how to avoid it being applied. Thank you for this excellent breakdown of a complex area of the law, which, becomes constitutional due to the 5th amendment’s double jeopardy protection. That is what drew me to it.
I first came across the application of collateral estoppel in a case decided by the 11th Circuit in Daniel Kordash v USA. They affirmed the decision from the District court by finding that the four elements necessary to apply collateral estoppel were present. One case they cited was Miller’s Ale House Inc. v Boynton Carolina Ale House (LLC, 702 F.3d 1312) which I mention because the court battle there was so very interesting, and set a precedent for this one.
Kordash is a fascinating case, and I learned so much from it in its entirety. The opinions in the District court and then the Circuit affirmation are very long, but I highly recommend law students read them. There was clearly a difference in the level of experience and expertise among the lawyers. I believe that Kordash could have avoided collateral estoppel with it’s affirmative result and having his issue precluded. The end of the road for him, and certainly not the outcome he had fought for.
He tried very hard, along with his team(s) but I think that his appeal was doomed by his lawyers in the district court. This case was for council well versed in (avoiding, or applying) issue preclusion, and, on this side of the aisle, how to avoid it being applied.
Thank you for this excellent breakdown of a complex area of the law, which, becomes constitutional due to the 5th amendment’s double jeopardy protection. That is what drew me to it.
Thank you for posting this. I am studying law online and its really confusing.
My Online Law School is finally getting organized. 📑
thanks for looking down and reading from a piece of paper....real helpful