The following excerpt is from Conte v. Justice, 996 F.2d 1398 (2nd Cir. 1993):
As noted above, the totality of the circumstances approach to the control theory of privity adopted in Watts has prevented courts from fixating on one general rule of application. Nevertheless, several factors indicative of control have emerged. Clearly, the appearance of the same attorney in both actions creates the impression that the interests represented are identical. Id. ("[i]t is of singular significance that the two actions were prosecuted simultaneously by the same law firm"); see Ruiz v. Commissioner of the Dep't of Transp., 858 F.2d 898, 903 (2d Cir.1988) (citing Watts ); In re Arbitration between
Page 1403
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.