Hay Groug Mgt v. Schneider —civil—partial reversal—Roth
The Third Circuit today issued a 15-page opinion, 15 months after the oral argument, deciding a claim-preclusion question. Applying Pennsylvania law, the district court had ruled that a party’s claim was precluded because it could have been raised in prior related litigation in the German courts. The Third Circuit disagreed, explaining that under Pennsylvania law the relevant question was instead whether the claim was required to be raised. On this basis, the court affirmed summary judgment as to one of the party’s claims but vacated and remanded on the other.
Joining Roth were McKee and Fuentes. Arguing counsel were Jeremy Heep of Troutman Pepper for the appellant and Karl Geercken of Alston & Bird for the appellee.