Willamette Law Online

Oregon Court of Appeals


ListPreviousNext


Ewald and Ewald

Summarized by: 

Date Filed: 12-19-2012
Case #: A146609
Armstrong, P.J., for the Court; Haselton, C.J.; and Duncan, J.
Full Text Opinion: http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/docs/A146609.pdf

Civil Procedure: Claim preclusion prohibits relitigation of claims that could have been brought in the prior action from being brought in a separate action, but does not bar relitigation of claims raised in the same proceeding before the same court.

Husband appealed the judgment setting aside the parties' (default) dissolution judgment pursuant to ORCP 71(B)(1)(d) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Husband argued Wife's motion to set aside the dissolution judgment was barred pursuant to the doctrine of claim preclusion because the doctrine applied to all claims, including lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Court held the doctrine of claim preclusion is inapplicable to this case. Claim preclusion prohibits relitigation of claims that could have been brought in the prior action from being brought in a separate action, but does not bar relitigation of claims raised in the same proceeding before the same court. Accordingly, Wife's motion to set aside the (default) dissolution judgment for lack of subject matter jurisdiction was not barred by claim preclusion because it was brought under the same case and before the same court. Affirmed.