Zybach v. Perryman

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Civil Procedure
  • Date Filed: 10-19-2016
  • Case #: A154764
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Egan, J. for the court; Armstrong P.J.; & Hadlock, C.J.
  • Full Text Opinion

Summary judgment granted on the doctrines of issue preclusion and claim preclusion may be upheld if there is no issue of material fact as a matter of law.

Zybach appealed the trial court's grant of Perryman's motion for summary judgment, on the grounds of issue preclusion and claim preclusion. The trial court based its ruling on the conclusion that the key issues raised in probate court were the same brought to the trial court. In this appeal, Zybach contended summary judgment was granted in error because (1) even though “both proceedings involved [an issue raised in the first proceeding] the second proceeding had additional issues” and (2) he was not “fully represented” in the initial proceeding. Perryman contended the trial court properly applied the doctrines of claim preclusion and issue preclusion. On appeal, the evidence is considered in the light most favorable to the party not granted summary judgment, and will only be affirmed if the court of appeals determines there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the party was granted summary judgment as a matter of law. Based on the doctrine of issue preclusion, the Court concluded that while the key issue raised in the second proceeding was the same as the first, there was an addition issue raised that was not actually litigated in the initial proceeding and “was not essential to the final decision on the merits of the first proceeding”. Based on the doctrine of claim preclusion, the Court concluded that there was a disputed issue of fact whether Zybach was in privity of the initial proceeding.  The trial court erred in granting summary judgment based on the doctrines of issue preclusion and claim preclusion. Reversed and remanded. 

Advanced Search

Back to Top