1. Same Parties
2. Same Claim
3. Valid Final Judgment on the Merits
4. Movant trying to bar the whole claim or just an issue?
   1. Whole Claim (RES JUDICATA or ESTOPPEL BY JUDGMENT)
      1. Is it the Same Parties?
         1. Yes: i.e. suit 1: FEINGOLD v. NOMURA and suit 2: FEINGOLD v. NOMURA
         2. No:
            1. Are the parties in Privity (any yes= PRIVITY?)
            2. Was there an agreement between parties to be bound by prior action?
            3. Yes
            4. No
            5. Was there a substantive legal relationship (think vertical privity)
            6. Yes
            7. No
            8. Was there adeequate representation by someone with the same interests who was a party (trustees, guardians)
            9. Yes
            10. No
            11. Had they assumed control over prior litigation?
            12. Yes
            13. No
            14. Are they relitigating through a proxy? (TAYLOR v. STURGELL)
            15. Yes
            16. Open question whether Herrick = undisclosed agent
            17. remand to find out
            18. No
            19. Are there any special statutory schemes?
            20. Yes
            21. No
            22. Then they are not in privity; thus they are not the same parties, and CP cannot apply
      2. Is it the Same Claim?
         1. What's the definition of claim? (Frier v. City of Vandalia) distinction between claims in Pleading and for Res Judicata
            1. Do the state's laws and interpretation of laws favor a broad or narrow idea of claim?
            2. Broad
            3. Is the 2nd claim out of the same transaction or occurence?
            4. Yes
            5. No
            6. It's not the same claim
            7. Narrow
            8. Is the 2nd claim based upon the same evidence?
            9. Yes
            10. No
            11. It's not the same claim
            12. Exceptions:
            13. If C/A couldn't be brought in 1st suit (ie small claims court), then there is not claim preclusion of that C/A
      3. Was there a valid final judgment on the merits?
         1. Was it a valid
            1. Yes: Barring no evidence that the judgment was not valid, then the default is that it is valid.
            2. No:
            3. Gargallo v. Merrill Lynch
            4. FED. SEC. not within Ohio's SMJ. FED. CT. USES OHIO LAW says no SMJ no VFJ and no CP
         2. Was if Final? (In CA has the S. S.C. declined writ or ruled on it?
            1. Yes: In CA if SC has ruled or passed on case, then it's final
            2. No: Then not final.
            3. Exception:
            4. If action is given preclusive effect, then the case it was precluded upon is somehow later reversed
            5. 60(b)(5): allow releif from judgment if "a prior judgment upon whihc it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer equitable that the judgment should have prospective application"
         3. Was it "on the merits" = everything but 12 b 1-5 and 7; clear up 41 later (includes SANCTIONS)(includes DEFAULT supposing no tricks)
            1. Yes: If 50(a), 50(b) 56, 41(a), 41(b), 12(c) or jury verdict or judge verdict, then it's on the merits!
            2. No: if it's 12 b 1-5 or 12 b 7 it's not on the merits.
   2. Just an Issue