GENERAL LEGAL PRINCIPLES; COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL; RES JUDICATA – In General

Single Topic for Decision A497M

View all topics for Decision A497M

Full Decision Text (click on the link to view): Full Text

PERB is not bound by the findings and conclusions of another administrative decision unless collateral estoppel applies. (San Diego Unified School District (1991) PERB Decision No. 885, p. 74). The doctrine of collateral estoppel precludes the relitigation of an issue already decided in another proceeding where: (1) the issue decided in the prior proceeding is identical to that sought to be relitigated; (2) the previous proceeding resulted in a final judgment on the merits; and (3) the party against whom collateral estoppel is asserted was a party or in privity with a party in the prior proceeding. (State of California (Department of Developmental Services) (1987) PERB Decision No. 619-S, p. 14, citing People v. Sims (1982) 32 Cal.3d 468, 484.) Collateral estoppel effect may be given to decisions of administrative agencies when: (1) the agency is acting in a judicial capacity; (2) it resolves disputed issues of fact properly before it; and (3) the parties have had an adequate opportunity to litigate such disputed issues. (State of California (Department of Developmental Services), supra, pp. 14-15; People v. Sims, supra, 32 Cal.3d at p. 484.) In this matter, the Board did not proceed past the first step of analysis, as the issues decided in the prior proceeding were not identical to those raised by the Association’s severance petition. (pp. 27-28.)