Constructive Res Judicata differs from traditional Res Judicata in that it extends the principle of finality to issues that were not directly addressed in a prior case but could have been raised. While traditional Res Judicata applies to issues that were actually decided in a previous case, Constructive Res Judicata bars the re-litigation of matters that could have been raised and litigated, even if they were not formally included in the previous suit. This difference impacts the outcome of a case by broadening the scope of what can be considered conclusively settled. The implication is that in cases where Constructive Res Judicata applies, even if a party did not directly argue a particular issue in the prior suit, they may be precluded from bringing it up in future litigation. This can prevent parties from having a full opportunity to litigate certain claims or defenses, potentially limiting their rights, but it also serves to promote judicial efficiency by avoiding repetitive litigation of issues that should have been addressed earlier.
