Hearings & Proceedings
9. Res Judicata and Collateral Estoppel
Office of Consumers Counsel v. Public Utilities Commission (1985), 16 Ohio St.3d 9. The doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel are applicable to administrative agencies; these doctrines operate to preclude the relitigation of a point of law or fact that was at issue in a former action between the same parties and which have been passed upon by a court of competent jurisdiction.
State, ex rel. Westchester Estates v. Bacon (1980), 61 Ohio St.2d 42. Where there is identity of parties and of issues, an earlier decision may be used to bar litigation of identical issues in a later case involving a different cause of action under the doctrine of collateral estoppel.
Kemp v. Montville Plastics & Rubber (Feb. 9, 1990), Geauga App. No. 89-G-1503, unreported, 1990 WL 10951. Res judicata bars a subsequent motion for relief when the motion is based upon the same facts and asserts the same grounds for relief, and it is certain that the issue could have been raised, in prior motions.
Cipalla v. Ohio Dept. of Administrative Services (July 23, 1990), PBR 89-REC-12-0751; rev'd (Jan. 1991), Franklin Co. No. 90CVF09-6742, unreported; aff'd (June 1991), Franklin App. No. 91-AP-308, unreported, 1991 WL 124411. The application of the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel to an administrative agency's discretion require an identity of parties in both original and subsequent proceedings, an identity of factual and legal issues raised in both proceedings, and the proceedings must be quasi-judicial in nature, meaning that they must provide notice, a hearing, and an opportunity to introduce evidence.