When dealing with Constructive Res Judicata in litigation, several common pitfalls should be avoided. One major mistake is failing to thoroughly review prior litigation, including whether the issue could have been raised in the previous case. If this step is overlooked, a party might inadvertently accept the preclusive effect of the doctrine without fully exploring potential exceptions or nuances in the original case. Another common pitfall is inadequate identification of exceptions—such as new evidence or changed circumstances—that could justify reopening the matter. Ignoring these exceptions can lead to an unjust application of the doctrine. Additionally, poorly crafted pleadings that fail to clearly argue why Constructive Res Judicata should not apply can lead to a dismissal without properly presenting the case’s unique facts. Overlooking jurisdictional and procedural differences in multi-jurisdictional cases can also cause errors in applying the doctrine. These mistakes can significantly impact the case's outcome, potentially resulting in the wrongful dismissal of a claim or defense, or the improper barring of an issue that should have been litigated. Avoiding these pitfalls ensures a fair trial and enhances the chances of a successful legal outcome.
