Robison

“Because there must be an end to litigation, the legal principle of res judicata is a salutary one and should be freely applied,” says the successful litigant.

“Yes, but — ”, replies his adversary, “yes, but our case is different. As to us, res judicata should not be invoked because,” etc.

Debates of this type have been going on for centuries. In a towering milestone in the law of res judicata, a California jurist who attained a place on the United States Supreme Court, gave a masterly elucidation of the principle. We refer to Mr. Justice Field’s opinion in Cromwell v. County of Sac, 1877, 94 U.S. 351, 352-353 , 24 L.Ed. 195 , which íes to be quoted from hereinafter.

1. Statement of the Case

This is the second appeal in the instant case. With the exception of two crucial pleadings and a crucial prior decree, the relevant record in this case will not be summarized herein, since it is amply stated in our first opinion, published sub nom. Sidebotham v. Robison, 9 Cir., 1954, 216 F.2d 816 . The three vital documents will be fully summarized hereinafter.

2. The Appellee’s Statement of “Claim of Interest” in the Estate of Sidebotham Filed in San Francisco On December 4, 1952

In…