ACLU is a fact witness and not a party to Johnny’s lawsuit. Same as Eric George since she is claiming she wrote the OpEd with advice of counsel. But in the end, she signed her name to that OpEd. And, now, importantly they will get all the drafts (which per the emails will show she was trying to mention her ex-husband and the TRO at least—showing her version of the OpEd was about Johnny)
This dismissal is her trying to say, look a judge in an English court found him guilty of abuse so that means I didn’t lie so my OpEd was true. So this is a waste of time and money and should be dismissed.
But that might work if all the parties are the same— she was not a party in that case. The judge refused to compel her to provide evidence Johnny needed etc. The law they are citing is for same parties or parties in privity (treated the same-treated identically). So if NGN lost, she would also pay damages? No. So she wasn’t equal to NGN as a party. Yes she “benefited” that NGN won, but she isn’t getting a financial award either. That’s how it was explained to me
Privity: an interest in a transaction, contract, or esp. action that does not derive from direct participation but from a relationship to one of the parties or from having an interest identical to one in the original subject matter
: the condition or relationship of having such an interest [a party in ] see also predecessor in interest NOTE: A claim may be barred by res judicata or collateral estoppel if the plaintiff's interests are identical, by relationship or subject matter, to those of a party to a previous action in which the plaintiff did not participate but which is deemed to have resulted in an adjudication of the plaintiff's rights.
Collateral estoppel applies when the following five elements are satisfied: “(1) the identical issues were presented in a prior proceeding; (2) there was a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issues in the prior proceeding; (3) the issues in the prior litigation were a critical and necessary part of the prior determination; (4) the parties in the two proceedings were identical; and (5) the issues were actually litigated in the prior proceeding.
Res judicata applies when the following four identities are satisfied: “(1) identity of the thing sued for; (2) identity of the cause of action; (3) identity of persons and parties to the action; and (4) identity of the quality of the persons for or against whom the claim is made.”