Res Judicata Eliminates Second Suit
Post 5056
See the full video at https://lnkd.in/gfeiyYgX and at https://lnkd.in/gwH87tHz, and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5050 posts.
Final Judgment Prohibits a Second Try
JC Robinson, Jr. (“JC”), pro se, appealed the trial court’s summary judgment decision in favor of defendant-appellee, Progressive Insurance Corporation (“Progressive”). In JC Robinson, Jr., et al. v. Progressive, 2025-Ohio-1370, No. 114348, Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga (April 17, 2025) the Court of Appeals resolved the dispute.
FACTS
In May 2024, JC sued Progressive on behalf of himself and his minor daughter, E.R., (collectively “the Robinsons”). JC claimed that the Robinsons were involved in a “hit-and-skip,” rear-end, motor vehicle accident in November 2023 (“the MVA”) resulting in property damage, physical and mental injuries, medical expenses, lost income, and loss of enjoyment of life. JC claimed that the Robinsons’ presented to an emergency room after calling 9-1-1 following the MVA and that their medical treatment was ongoing.
Progressive filed a motion to dismiss the C.P. Complaint in its entirety. Progressive argued that the C.P. Complaint was barred by res judicata and claim preclusion, noting that this was the second lawsuit the Robinsons filed against Progressive stemming from the MVA.
The Robinsons previously filed a complaint in JC Robinson, Jr. v. Progressive Ins. Corp., Cleveland M.C. No. 2023-CVI-0013723 (“Mun. Complaint”), which was dismissed with prejudice in March 2024.
Progressive filed a supplemental motion for summary judgment. However, JC argued that Progressive was responsible for 100 percent of the Robinsons medical bills, pain and suffering and loss of wages and those claims had not been settled.
In September 2024, the trial court granted Progressive’s motion for summary judgment “for the reasons argued in the briefs, namely res judicata.” JC appealed.
LAW AND ANALYSIS
Summary Judgment and Res Judicata
JC argued that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because it was unreasonable, unjust, and unconstitutional to strictly apply the doctrine of res judicata when the Robinsons’ claims were not ripe for review, litigated, or dismissed on the merits.
Pro se litigants are presumed to have knowledge of the law and legal procedures and are held to the same standards as litigants who are represented by counsel. Indeed, pro se litigants are not entitled to greater rights, and they must accept the results of their own mistakes.
One of the principal purposes of the summary judgment rule is to isolate and dispose of factually unsupported claims or defenses. There can be no genuine issue as to any material fact, since a complete failure of proof concerning an essential element of a non-moving party’s case necessarily renders all other facts immaterial
After the moving party’s initial burden is satisfied, the nonmoving party may not rest upon the mere allegations or denials in the pleadings. Rather, the nonmoving party’s reciprocal burden is triggered, requiring it to set forth specific facts showing that there remains a genuine issue for trial. A trial court may consider evidence other than the materials specified in the motion if no objections are raised.
Res judicata ensures the finality and stability of judicial decisions, deters vexatious litigation, and allows courts to resolve other disputes. The doctrine prevents a party from relitigating an issue or claim that has already been decided in a final, appealable order or a valid, final judgment in a prior proceeding and could have been raised on appeal in that prior proceeding.
The Ohio Supreme Court adopted res judicata’s modern application, which includes claim preclusion and issue preclusion. The claims raised in the C.P. Complaint are barred by claim preclusion. First, a court of competent jurisdiction rendered a valid, final judgment on the merits in an earlier action. A dismissal with prejudice is a final decision on the merits. The current case involves the same parties or their privies.
The C.P. Complaint raises claims that were or could have been raised in the Mun. Complaint. JC pleaded the same breach-of-contract, unfair-claims practices, and bad-faith claims, which were previously raised in the Mun. Complaint.
The C.P. Complaint arises out of the same operative facts and evidence as the Mun. Complaint. The MVA and Progressive’s handling of the Robinsons’ claims under JC’s automobile insurance policy. An exception to the res judicata doctrine will not apply when the parties had a full and fair opportunity to be heard on an issue.
After Progressive moved for summary judgment JC’s reciprocal burden was triggered. To survive summary judgment, JC was required to set forth specific facts rebutting the application of res judicata and showing that genuine issues remained. JC has not done so. The record reveals that JC had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the Robinsons’ claims; accepted a settlement from Progressive; voluntarily requested the dismissal of the Mun. Complaint with prejudice; and failed to pursue a direct appeal of the municipal court’s final, appealable order. JC failed to provide any evidence to rebut Progressive’s res judicata argument.
Because the doctrine of res judicata applies and no exception is warranted the trial court did not err in granting Progressive’s motion for summary judgment. The Judgment was affirmed.
ZALMA OPINION
Insurance companies must be treated like any other litigant. Once a suit is settled and a judgment entered, it’s dispute with JC was resolved. Yet JC, acting as his own lawyer, sued again seeking another bite out of Progressive. The Court of Appeals wisely affirmed the trial court.
(c) 2025 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.
Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.
Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe
Go to X @bzalma; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg; Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk
Convicted Criminal Seeks to Compel Receiver to Protect his Assets
Post number 5291
See the video at and at and at https://www.zalma.com/blog plus more than 5250 posts.
The Work of a Court Appointed Receiver is Constitutionally Protected
In Simon Semaan et al. v. Robert P. Mosier et al., G064385, California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, Third Division (February 6, 2026) the Court of Appeals applied the California anti-SLAPP statute which protects defendants from meritless lawsuits arising from constitutionally protected activities, including those performed in official capacities. The court also considered the doctrine of quasi-judicial immunity, which shields court-appointed receivers from liability for discretionary acts performed within their official duties.
Facts
In September 2021, the State of California filed felony charges against Simon Semaan, alleging violations of Insurance Code section 11760(a) for making...
When There are Two Different Other Insurance Clauses They Eliminate Each Other and Both Insurers Owe Indemnity Equally
Post number 5289
In Great West Casualty Co. v. Nationwide Agribusiness Insurance Co., and Conserv FS, Inc., and Timothy A. Brennan, as Administrator of the Estate of Pat- rick J. Brennan, deceased, Nos. 24-1258, 24-1259, United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit (February 11, 2026) the USCA was required to resolve a dispute that arose when a tractor-trailer operated by Robert D. Fisher (agent of Deerpass Farms Trucking, LLC-II) was involved in a side-impact collision with an SUV driven by Patrick J. Brennan, resulting in Brennan’s death.
Facts
Deerpass Trucking, an interstate motor carrier, leased the tractor from Deerpass Farms Services, LLC, and hauled cargo for Conserv FS, Inc. under a trailer interchange agreement. The tractor was insured by Great West Casualty Company with a $1 million policy limit, while the trailer was insured by Nationwide Agribusiness Insurance Company with a $2 million ...
Opiod Producer Seeks Indemnity from CGL Insurers
Post number 5288
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/guNhStN2, see the full video at https://lnkd.in/gYqkk-n3 and at https://lnkd.in/g8U3ehuc, and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5250 posts.
Insurers Exclude Damages Due to Insured’s Products
In Matthew Dundon, As The Trustee Of The Endo General Unsecured Creditors’ Trust v. ACE Property And Casualty Insurance Company, et al., Civil Action No. 24-4221, United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania (February 10, 2026) Matthew Dundon, trustee of the Endo General Unsecured Creditors’ Trust, sued multiple commercial general liability (CGL) insurers for coverage of opioid-related litigation involving Endo International PLC a pharmaceutical manufacturer.
KEY FACTS
Beginning as early as 2014, thousands of opioid suits were filed by governments, third parties, and individuals alleging harms tied to opioid manufacturing and marketing.
Bankruptcy & Settlements
Endo filed Chapter 11 in August 2022; before bankruptcy it ...
Passover for Americans
Posted on February 19, 2026 by Barry Zalma
“The Passover Seder For Americans”
For more than 3,000 years Jewish fathers have told the story of the Exodus of the enslaved Jews from Egypt. Telling the story has been required of all Jewish fathers. Americans, who have lived in North America for more than 300 years have become Americans and many have lost the ability to read, write and understand the Hebrew language in which the story of Passover was first told in the Torah. Passover is one of the many holidays Jewish People celebrate to help them remember the importance of G_d in their lives. We see the animals, the oceans, the rivers, the mountains, the rain, sun, the planets, the stars, and the people and wonder how did all these wonderful things come into being. Jews believe the force we call G_d created the entire universe and everything in it. Jews feel G_d is all seeing and knowing and although we can’t see Him, He is everywhere and in everyone.We understand...
Passover for Americans
Posted on February 19, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/passover-americans-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-5vgkc.
“The Passover Seder For Americans”
For more than 3,000 years Jewish fathers have told the story of the Exodus of the enslaved Jews from Egypt. Telling the story has been required of all Jewish fathers. Americans, who have lived in North America for more than 300 years have become Americans and many have lostthe ability to read, write and understand the Hebrew language in which the story of Passover was first told in the Torah.
Passover is one of the many holidays Jewish People celebrate to help them remember the importance of G_d in their lives. We see the animals, the oceans, the rivers, the mountains, the rain, sun, the planets, the stars, and the people and ...
You Get What You Pay For – Less Coverage Means Lower Premium
Post number 5275
Posted on January 30, 2026 by Barry Zalma
See the video at and at
When Experts for Both Sides Agree That Two Causes Concur to Cause a Wall to Collapse Exclusion Applies
In Lido Hospitality, Inc. v. AIX Specialty Insurance Company, No. 1-24-1465, 2026 IL App (1st) 241465-U, Court of Appeals of Illinois (January 27, 2026) resolved the effect of an anti-concurrent cause exclusion to a loss with more than one cause.
Facts and Background
Lido Hospitality, Inc. operates the Lido Motel in Franklin Park, Illinois. In November 2020, a windstorm caused one of the motel’s brick veneer walls to collapse. At the time, Lido was insured under a policy issued by AIX Specialty Insurance Company which provided coverage for windstorm damage. However, the policy contained an exclusion for any loss or damage directly or indirectly resulting from ...
