{
  "version": "2.0",
  "drillId": "claim_preclusion_epa_bonus_v2",
  "doctrineId": "claim_preclusion",
  "title": "Claim Preclusion \u2014 omitted Equal Pay Act claim",
  "ruleText": "Claim preclusion bars a later claim when the same parties litigated to a valid final judgment on the merits and the later claim arises from the same transaction that could have been raised earlier.",
  "factPattern": "Jordan sued Brightfield in state court over an unpaid $40,000 bonus. The court granted summary judgment for Brightfield. Jordan later filed a federal Equal Pay Act suit based on the same compensation dispute, but that statutory theory was not included in the first case.",
  "entityRegistry": [
    {
      "id": "party.jordan",
      "type": "person",
      "display": "Jordan",
      "aliases": [
        "Jordan",
        "employee",
        "plaintiff",
        "she"
      ],
      "roles": [
        "plaintiff",
        "employee"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "party.brightfield",
      "type": "organization",
      "display": "Brightfield",
      "aliases": [
        "Brightfield",
        "employer",
        "defendant",
        "company"
      ],
      "roles": [
        "defendant",
        "employer"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "proceeding.prior_state_action",
      "type": "proceeding",
      "display": "prior state action",
      "aliases": [
        "first case",
        "first action",
        "prior state action",
        "earlier lawsuit",
        "state court action"
      ],
      "attributes": {
        "forum": "state_court",
        "sequence": "prior"
      }
    },
    {
      "id": "proceeding.later_federal_action",
      "type": "proceeding",
      "display": "later federal action",
      "aliases": [
        "later suit",
        "later action",
        "federal case",
        "subsequent lawsuit"
      ],
      "attributes": {
        "forum": "federal_court",
        "sequence": "later"
      }
    },
    {
      "id": "amount.bonus_40000",
      "type": "amount",
      "display": "$40,000 bonus",
      "aliases": [
        "$40,000 bonus",
        "40000 bonus",
        "forty-thousand-dollar bonus",
        "bonus"
      ],
      "attributes": {
        "amount": 40000,
        "currency": "USD"
      }
    }
  ],
  "factTable": [
    {
      "id": "f1",
      "subjectId": "proceeding.prior_state_action",
      "predicate": "forum",
      "objectLiteral": "state_court"
    },
    {
      "id": "f2",
      "subjectId": "proceeding.prior_state_action",
      "predicate": "outcome",
      "objectLiteral": "summary_judgment_for_brightfield"
    },
    {
      "id": "f3",
      "subjectId": "proceeding.prior_state_action",
      "predicate": "concerns",
      "objectId": "amount.bonus_40000"
    },
    {
      "id": "f4",
      "subjectId": "proceeding.later_federal_action",
      "predicate": "claim_type",
      "objectLiteral": "equal_pay_act"
    },
    {
      "id": "f5",
      "subjectId": "proceeding.later_federal_action",
      "predicate": "concerns",
      "objectId": "amount.bonus_40000"
    },
    {
      "id": "f6",
      "subjectId": "claim.equal_pay_act",
      "predicate": "omitted_from",
      "objectId": "proceeding.prior_state_action"
    }
  ],
  "elements": [
    {
      "id": "el.final_judgment",
      "label": "final judgment on the merits",
      "propositionIds": [
        "prop.summary_judgment_for_brightfield"
      ],
      "completionRule": {
        "mode": "all_of"
      }
    },
    {
      "id": "el.same_transaction",
      "label": "same transaction or occurrence",
      "propositionIds": [
        "prop.same_bonus_dispute"
      ],
      "completionRule": {
        "mode": "all_of"
      }
    },
    {
      "id": "el.could_have_been_raised",
      "label": "later claim could have been raised earlier",
      "propositionIds": [
        "prop.later_epa_claim",
        "prop.omitted_epa_claim"
      ],
      "completionRule": {
        "mode": "all_of"
      }
    }
  ],
  "propositions": [
    {
      "id": "prop.summary_judgment_for_brightfield",
      "elementId": "el.final_judgment",
      "circleLabel": "summary judgment for Brightfield",
      "canonical": "The prior state action ended in summary judgment for Brightfield.",
      "kind": "fact",
      "requiredSlots": [
        {
          "id": "slot.prior_proceeding",
          "name": "prior proceeding",
          "kind": "proceeding",
          "entityIds": [
            "proceeding.prior_state_action"
          ],
          "minConfidence": 0.75,
          "weight": 1.0
        },
        {
          "id": "slot.summary_judgment",
          "name": "summary judgment outcome",
          "kind": "outcome",
          "conceptIds": [
            "outcome.summary_judgment"
          ],
          "minConfidence": 0.8,
          "weight": 1.2,
          "disallowAliases": [
            "judgment"
          ]
        },
        {
          "id": "slot.beneficiary_brightfield",
          "name": "beneficiary",
          "kind": "entity",
          "entityIds": [
            "party.brightfield"
          ],
          "minConfidence": 0.75,
          "weight": 1.0
        }
      ],
      "positives": [
        "In the first state case, Brightfield won on summary judgment.",
        "The earlier lawsuit ended with summary judgment for Brightfield.",
        "Jordan lost the prior state action when the court granted Brightfield summary judgment."
      ],
      "paraphrasePositives": [
        "The state court disposed of the first suit in Brightfield's favor without a trial.",
        "Brightfield obtained judgment at the summary stage in the earlier action.",
        "The first case was resolved on summary disposition for the employer."
      ],
      "nearMisses": [
        "The court entered judgment.",
        "The first case ended.",
        "Brightfield won the later federal suit."
      ],
      "fillerNegatives": [
        "Courts often enter judgment when one side lacks evidence.",
        "A party may seek summary judgment in many civil cases.",
        "Brightfield was a defendant in court."
      ],
      "whyMatters": "Claim preclusion requires a valid final judgment on the merits in the first action."
    },
    {
      "id": "prop.same_bonus_dispute",
      "elementId": "el.same_transaction",
      "circleLabel": "same $40,000 bonus dispute",
      "canonical": "The later Equal Pay Act claim arises from the same $40,000 bonus dispute as the prior state action.",
      "kind": "inference",
      "requiredSlots": [
        {
          "id": "slot.same_relation",
          "name": "same dispute relation",
          "kind": "relation",
          "conceptIds": [
            "relation.same_bonus_dispute"
          ],
          "minConfidence": 0.8,
          "weight": 1.2
        },
        {
          "id": "slot.bonus_amount",
          "name": "bonus amount",
          "kind": "amount",
          "entityIds": [
            "amount.bonus_40000"
          ],
          "minConfidence": 0.85,
          "weight": 1.0
        }
      ],
      "positives": [
        "Both suits concern the same $40,000 bonus dispute.",
        "The federal claim stems from the same unpaid bonus that was litigated before.",
        "Jordan's later pay claim is based on the identical $40,000 compensation fight."
      ],
      "paraphrasePositives": [
        "The later action grows out of the same pay controversy over the bonus.",
        "Both cases are about the same compensation transaction.",
        "The bonus issue is the common nucleus of both suits."
      ],
      "nearMisses": [
        "Both cases involve employment.",
        "The later claim is also against Brightfield.",
        "Jordan sought money in both cases."
      ],
      "fillerNegatives": [
        "Compensation disputes can involve bonuses or wages.",
        "The same transaction test looks to related facts.",
        "A later federal claim may be precluded by an earlier case."
      ],
      "whyMatters": "The later claim must arise from the same transaction or occurrence as the first action."
    },
    {
      "id": "prop.later_epa_claim",
      "elementId": "el.could_have_been_raised",
      "circleLabel": "later federal Equal Pay Act claim",
      "canonical": "Jordan later filed a federal Equal Pay Act claim.",
      "kind": "fact",
      "requiredSlots": [
        {
          "id": "slot.later_action",
          "name": "later action",
          "kind": "action",
          "conceptIds": [
            "action.filed_later"
          ],
          "minConfidence": 0.7,
          "weight": 0.9
        },
        {
          "id": "slot.epa_claim",
          "name": "Equal Pay Act claim",
          "kind": "legal_claim",
          "conceptIds": [
            "claim.equal_pay_act"
          ],
          "minConfidence": 0.85,
          "weight": 1.2
        }
      ],
      "positives": [
        "Jordan later filed an Equal Pay Act suit.",
        "She subsequently brought a federal Equal Pay Act claim.",
        "After the first case, Jordan sued under the Equal Pay Act."
      ],
      "paraphrasePositives": [
        "Jordan then asserted a federal pay-equity claim.",
        "She later brought the EPA count in federal court.",
        "A subsequent Equal Pay Act action followed."
      ],
      "nearMisses": [
        "Jordan filed a later suit.",
        "Jordan brought a federal claim.",
        "Jordan raised a wage issue."
      ],
      "fillerNegatives": [
        "Federal claims may be filed after state cases.",
        "The Equal Pay Act is a federal statute.",
        "A plaintiff later sued in court."
      ],
      "whyMatters": "The later claim must be identified before the system can assess whether it should have been raised earlier."
    },
    {
      "id": "prop.omitted_epa_claim",
      "elementId": "el.could_have_been_raised",
      "circleLabel": "EPA claim not raised earlier",
      "canonical": "The Equal Pay Act claim was not raised in the prior state action.",
      "kind": "fact",
      "requiredSlots": [
        {
          "id": "slot.omitted_claim_type",
          "name": "claim type",
          "kind": "legal_claim",
          "conceptIds": [
            "claim.equal_pay_act"
          ],
          "minConfidence": 0.85,
          "weight": 1.1
        },
        {
          "id": "slot.omission_state",
          "name": "omission",
          "kind": "state",
          "conceptIds": [
            "state.not_raised_in_prior_action"
          ],
          "minConfidence": 0.85,
          "weight": 1.3,
          "disallowAliases": [
            "claim",
            "raised",
            "action"
          ]
        },
        {
          "id": "slot.omission_prior_case",
          "name": "prior case",
          "kind": "proceeding",
          "entityIds": [
            "proceeding.prior_state_action"
          ],
          "minConfidence": 0.75,
          "weight": 1.0
        }
      ],
      "positives": [
        "Jordan did not raise the Equal Pay Act theory in the first state case.",
        "The EPA claim was omitted from the earlier lawsuit.",
        "She never brought the Equal Pay Act count in the prior action."
      ],
      "paraphrasePositives": [
        "The federal pay-equity claim was left out of the first case.",
        "Jordan failed to assert that statutory wage-equality theory in the earlier suit.",
        "The EPA count was not included when she sued in state court."
      ],
      "nearMisses": [
        "Jordan raised a claim in the first action.",
        "The Equal Pay Act claim exists.",
        "The first action was in state court."
      ],
      "fillerNegatives": [
        "Claims can be brought in an earlier action.",
        "Courts ask whether a claim was raised before.",
        "The first action involved a claim and a court."
      ],
      "contradictions": [
        "Jordan raised the Equal Pay Act claim in the first suit.",
        "The earlier action already included the EPA count."
      ],
      "whyMatters": "This proposition is the heart of the 'could have been raised' analysis. It requires the statutory claim, the omission, and the prior proceeding."
    }
  ],
  "conceptLibraryRefs": [
    "claim.equal_pay_act",
    "state.not_raised_in_prior_action",
    "outcome.summary_judgment",
    "forum.state_court",
    "relation.same_bonus_dispute",
    "action.filed_later"
  ],
  "pedagogy": {
    "ruleExplanation": "The student should identify the first judgment, connect the later claim to the same bonus dispute, and note that the Equal Pay Act theory was omitted from the first action.",
    "formulaScaffold": "Same parties + valid final judgment + same transaction + could have been raised earlier = claim preclusion.",
    "commonMistakes": [
      "Mentioning only that there was a first case, without its outcome.",
      "Mentioning the Equal Pay Act claim without saying it was omitted earlier.",
      "Talking about general fairness or litigation strategy instead of the same bonus dispute."
    ]
  }
}