Revisiting the Second Restatement of Judgments: Issue Preclusion and Related Problems

Abstract

The event of this symposium on the Restatement (Second) of Judgments is welcome to the Reporter. It signifies that the work is done and the indenture fulfilled. Only those who have been involved in one of these long term enterprises can appreciate how much that means. Beyond that, it is deeply gratifying to have a signal that the project seems successful. During such a venture, the participants never know for sure that success will be achieved, for they are bent in a curious mixture of relentless self-criticism and continual self-congratulation, the latter reflecting partly genuine mutual esteem and partly a conscious effort to sustain purpose and morale. I take from what is said here, and what is not said, that the enterprise came out pretty well. If working conventional law is worth doing, and if a Restatement is a worthwhile way of working the law, then the verdict is that the Restatement (Second) of Judgments has been worthwhile. There are not many things of which that can be said with real conviction.