Jarosz v. Palmer
Supreme Court of Massachusetts
436 Mass. 526 (2002)
Jarosz (plaintiff) hired attorney Palmer (defendant) to help him and his partners acquire Union Products. After a falling out, the partners fired Jarosz, who sued them and Union Products for wrongful termination; Palmer represented the partners in that suit. Jarosz moved to disqualify Palmer, claiming a prior attorney-client relationship, but the judge found no such relationship was proven. Jarosz then separately sued Palmer for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and malpractice. Palmer argued that the earlier finding on the attorney-client relationship precluded Jarosz from relitigating that issue, and the trial judge agreed, granting Palmer judgment on the pleadings. Jarosz appealed.
Whether issue preclusion bars a party from relitigating an issue that was actually litigated in an earlier case between the parties but was not essential to the judgment rendered on the underlying claims in that case.