DiPietro

DISCUSSION

Appellant maintains the trial court erred in sustaining respondent‟s demurrer without leave to amend on the ground that the ultimate facts underlying appellant‟s causes of action for fraud, negligent representation, constructive fraud, and financial elder abuse were previously adjudicated against him in the bankruptcy court, and therefore those claims are barred by the doctrine of collateral estoppel.4 “On demurrer a court considers the allegations on the face of the complaint and any matter of which it must or may take judicial notice. [Citation.] If judicially noticed records of prior litigation show the complaint is barred by collateral estoppel, the demurrer may be sustained. [Citations.] On appeal from the judgment of dismissal following the sustaining of the demurrer without leave to amend, we review the order de novo to determine whether as a matter of law the complaint is barred by collateral estoppel. [Citation.]” (Groves v. Peterson (2002) 100 Cal.App.4th 659, 667 (Groves).) “Collateral estoppel is one of two aspects of the doctrine of res judicata. In its narrowest form, res judicata „ “precludes parties or their privies from relitigating a cause of action…