Res Judicata. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to reduce the scope of the res judicata or claim preclusive effect that the settlement memorialized in this Agreement, and/or any Consent Judgment or other judgment entered on this Agreement, gives rise to under applicable law.
Res Judicata. Except as provided herein, if this Agreement is approved by the Court, any Party may file and otherwise rely upon this Agreement in any action that may be brought against such Party in order to support a defense or counterclaim based on the principles of res judicata, collateral estoppel, release, good faith settlement, judgment bar or reduction, or any other theory of claim preclusion or issue preclusion or similar defense or counterclaim.
Res Judicata. To the extent permitted by the law, any award by the Tribunal shall not be res judicata or have any binding effect in any unrelated litigation or arbitration where any Member may also be a member.
Res Judicata. The decision of the Arbitrator shall be final and binding as between the parties. Any claim or Dispute which is the subject of the Arbitration shall be res judicata between the parties.
Res Judicata. Collateral Estoppel and Law of the Case. A decision of the Arbitrator will have the same force and effect with respect to collateral estoppel, res judicata and law of the case that such decision would have been entitled to if decided in a court of law, but in no event will such a decision be used by or against a party to this Agreement in a Non-Signatory Action.
Res Judicata. DuPont argues that, regardless of whether the EPA waived enforcement over the Count II claim, the doctrine of res judicata bars the EPA from bringing those claims due to the EAB’s Consent Order that approved the parties’ Consent Agreement. DuPont’s Motion for Acc. Dec. at 27. The doctrine of res judicata, also known as claim preclusion, applies both to judicial consent decrees and to administrative consent agreements. In re Int’l Paper Co., RCRA (3008) Appeal No. 90-3, 3 E.A.D. 562, 567 (CJO 1991). Typically, when a court enters a final judgment on the merits in an action, the doctrine of res judicata bars the parties from re-litigating the same cause of action in a subsequent suit. In re Wego Chem. & Mineral Corp., TSCA Appeal No. 92-4, 4 E.A.D. 513, 520 (EAB 1993); Int’l Paper, 3 E.A.D. at 567; accord Nevada v. United States, 463 U.S. 110, 129-30 (1983). Under the doctrine of res judicata, the moving party bears the burden to show the following requirements: (1) there was a final judgment on the 47 Although not necessarily determinative, it would be helpful to be informed about the actions of the parties and other CAP participants with regards to “Phase 2” information generated from February 1, 1991 through June 27, 1996. In particular, prior to the instant case being filed, has the EPA ever brought any Section 8(e) enforcement action(s) against any CAP participant for failure to report any Section 8(e) information generated from February 1, 1991 through June 27, 1996? From February 1, 1991 up to the current date, did DuPont, or any other CAP participant, report to the EPA any “Phase 2” Section 8(e) information generated from February 1, 1991 through June 27, 1996? Arguably, such information may establish the parties’ course of performance. merits in a prior action, (2) involving the same parties, and (3) the subsequent proceeding is based on the same cause of action. Wego, 4 E.A.D. at 520. The parties disagree as to whether the subsequent proceeding is based on the same nucleus of operative facts. Oral Arg. Tr. at 80
Res Judicata. To the extent permitted by law, any decision of the Panel shall not be res judicata or have any binding effect in any unrelated litigation or arbitration where any Party to this Agreement may also be a party. EXHIBIT “K” HEALTH, SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT (“HSE”) Attached to and made a part of that certain Operating Agreement dated October 1, 2009 by and between BP Exploration & Production Inc., as Operator, and MOEX Offshore 2007 LLC, as Non-Operator Health, Safety and Environmental Management Systems
Res Judicata. To the extent permitted by law, any decision of the Panel shall not be res judicata or have any binding effect in any unrelated litigation or arbitration. EXHIBIT "G" ----------- Attached to and made a part of that certain Exploration Participation Agreement dated effective the 1st day of September, 2006, by and between Chevron U.S.A. Inc. and Ridgewood Energy Corporation Declaration of Agreement ------------------------ THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ss. STATE OF LOUISIANA ss. KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENT OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF ss.
Res Judicata. To the extent permitted by law, any decision of the Panel shall not be res judicata or have any binding effect in any unrelated litigation or arbitration. STWDJOA - Exhibit "H" Exhibit "I" Attached to and made a part of that certain Offshore Operating Agreement dated effective as of the _________day of _____ , 20 ___, between Chevron U.S.A. Inc., Dominion Exploration & Production, Inc. and Ridgewood Energy Corporation, covering ________________Block _____________, Federal Offshore, Gulf of Mexico
Res Judicata. To the extent permitted by law, any decision of the arbitration tribunal shall be res judicata as between the Parties but shall not have binding effect in any unrelated litigation or arbitration where any Party to this Agreement may also be a party.
