Most business people understand that if they are involved in a lawsuit, the final outcome is binding. What is not universally appreciated is that contested matters decided by government agencies can have a very similar result. The Supreme Court of Nevada has enforced what are called the doctrines of collateral estoppel and res judicata to judicial-like proceedings of administrative agencies once the case reaches a final conclusion. These two concepts are generally know as preclusion. Collateral estoppel prevents you from contesting an issue anew. Res judicata stops you from bringing the same claim again.
Most Nevada administrative lawyers agree there is a two-tiered test that must be satisfied before preclusion can be applied. The first tier is frequently referred to as the Utah Construction inquiries, which are –
- Did the administrative agency act in a “judicial” capacity.
- Did the parties have an adequate opportunity to litigate, that is timely and adequate notice, the right to be heard, and to offer evidence and testimony, the ability to rebut evidence and testimony, the right to be represented by counsel, and
- Was the decision made by an impartial party based upon evidence introduced at the hearing.
- Did the agency have jurisdiction, that is the power to decide the issue or claim under the organic statute of the agency, or there must be a reasoned interpretation of that statute giving the agency the authority to decide the specific matter in question.
If the Utah Construction inquiries are satisfied, then what are called the Britton elements must be established for preclusion to apply, namely –
- There as a final decision on the merits in the previous case; and
- The issue decided in the prior case was identical to the issue presented in the current dispute;
- The party against whom the results of that final decision will apply was a party, or so closely affiliated with a party that the earlier decision fairly can apply to them.
There can be unanticipated consequences in these situations that should be evaluated before going to battle with a state agency or in deciding not to ask a court to overturn the government’s decision after an agency hearing. For instance, if a state licensing body fines a company for violating a state unfair business practice law, that decision may be used in private civil damage lawsuits by injured customers.
REFERENCES
United States v. Utah Construction and Mining Company, 384 U.S. 394 (1966); University of Tennessee v. Elliott, 478 U.S. 788 (1986); Britton v. City of Las Vegas, 106 Nev. 690, 799 P.2d 568 (1990); Roberts v. Las Vegas Water District, 849 F. Supp. 1393 (D. Nev. 1994); Campbell v. State ex rel. Dep’t. of Taxation, 108 Nev. 215, 827 P.2d 833 (1995); Jerry’s Nugget v. Keith, 111 Nev. 49, 888 P.2d 921 (1995); K. C. Davis & R.J. Pierce, Jr., II Administrative Law, at 248 (3d ed. 1994).
ALL THINGS REGULATORY 