Tennessee
How Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University of Illinois Foundation applies in Tennessee: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Civil Procedure (Collateral Estoppel/Issue Preclusion) and Patent Law.
Tennessee follows a similar doctrine of collateral estoppel where a party seeking to invoke issue preclusion must show that the issue was actually litigated and determined in a prior action. The state also requires that the parties in the second action were either the same or in privity with the parties in the first action.
In Tennessee, collateral estoppel may be applied when there is (1) an identity of the parties; (2) a final judgment on the merits; and (3) an issue that was actually litigated and essential to the prior judgment.
The Tennessee Court of Appeals held that collateral estoppel applied because the same issue of negligence had been previously adjudicated and was essential to the final judgment.
The Tennessee Supreme Court applied the doctrine, stating that parties cannot relitigate issues that were already fully and fairly determined.
The court emphasized the necessity of having a final judgment for collateral estoppel to be applicable.
Tennessee's approach to collateral estoppel mirrors the federal standard, adhering closely to the requirement that an issue must have been actually litigated and necessary to the outcome in the previous case. However, Tennessee jurisprudence places a particular emphasis on the identity of parties being the same or in privity, which may differ slightly from some federal applications.
Tennessee's bar exam may include questions regarding the rules of issue preclusion, particularly in the context of evidence and civil procedure, making familiarity with Tennessee’s specific requirements crucial.