GERALD FINES, Chief Judge, Bankruptcy
This matter having come before the Court on a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendant, First National Bank in Toledo, and a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Plaintiff, John E. Maloney; the Court, having heard arguments of counsel, reviewed written memoranda filed by the parties, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Rule 7052 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure.
In its Motion for Summary Judgment, Defendant, First National Bank in Toledo, asserts that it should be dismissed as a Defendant in this proceeding based upon the principle of collateral estoppel. The Bank argues that an Order, entered in Cumberland County, Illinois, Cause No. 2002-CH-13, on September 19, 2003, dismissing an Amended Third Party Complaint with prejudice as to the First National Bank in Toledo, acts as a bar to the Trustee/Plaintiff's Complaint against the Bank in this matter.
It has long been recognized that the Doctrine of Collateral Estoppel dictates that an issue of fact or law necessary to a Court's judgment may not be relitigated in a suit in a different case involving the same parties as found in a previous case.Brown v. Felson 442 U.S. 127, 99 S.Ct. 2205 (1979); Klingman v. Levinson, 831 F.2d 1292 (7th Cir. 1987); In re Winston, 114 B.R. 566 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1990). In order for the Doctrine of Collateral Estoppel to apply, the Court must consider four factors and find in favor of the movant on each of these factors. The requirements for the application of the Doctrine of Collateral Estoppel, as recognized under Illinois law, are: (1) that the issue decided in the prior adjudication be identical to that in the present action; (2) that the resolution of that issue was necessary to the Court's judgment in the prior action; (3) that the party against whom the estoppel is asserted was a party or in privity with a party in the prior litigation; and (4) that the issue was actually litigated and decided on the merits in the prior suit. See: County of Cook v. MidCon, Corp., 773 F.2d 892 (7th Cir. 1985); and Klingman, supra, at 1295.
In considering the arguments of the Defendant Bank in this matter, the Court has carefully reviewed the record of the instant proceeding, the record of the State Court proceeding in Cumberland County Cause No. 2002-CH-13, and the Amended Third Party Complaint which was dismissed with prejudice as to Defendant, First National Bank in Toledo, by the Cumberland County Court on September 19, 2003. This review has caused the Court to conclude that the Doctrine of Collateral Estoppel is applicable, and, as such, the Trustee/Plaintiff's Complaint in this matter must be dismissed with prejudice as to Defendant, First National Bank in Toledo. In making this decision, the Court finds: (1) that the issue raised by the Trustee/Plaintiff as to Defendant, First National Bank in Toledo, in this case is identical to the issue raised by the Amended Third Party Complaint in the Cumberland County Case; (2) the resolution of the issue in the Cumberland County case was necessary to that Court's judgment; (3) the party against whom the estoppel is asserted in this case was, in essence, a party in the prior litigation in Cumberland County; and (4) the issue was clearly litigated in Cumberland County and decided on the merits when the Cumberland County Judge issued an order dismissing the Amended Third Party Complaint in the State Court case with prejudice. Considering these factors, this Court finds that the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendant, First National Bank in Toledo, must be allowed and that the Bank should be dismissed as a defendant in this adversary proceeding.
Having found that the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendant, First National Bank in Toledo, should be allowed based upon the Doctrine of Collateral Estoppel, the Court concludes that the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Trustee/Plaintiff, John E. Maloney, must be denied.
ORDER
For the reasons set forth in an Opinion entered on the 4th day of April 2005;
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
A. The Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendant, First National Bank in Toledo, is ALLOWED;
B. The Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Trustee/Plaintiff, John E. Maloney, is DENIED; and,
C. The Trustee/Plaintiff's Complaint in this proceeding isDISMISSED with prejudice as to Defendant, First National Bank in Toledo.