...R. R. Co. v. United States, 168 US 1, 48-49, is, that a question of fact or of law distinctly put hi issue and directly determined by a court of competent jurisdiction as a ground of recovery or defense in a suit or action between parties sui juris is conclusively settled by the final judgment...

...R. R. Co. v. United States, 168 US 1, 48-49, is, that a question of fact or of law distinctly put hi issue and directly determined by a court of competent jurisdiction as a ground of recovery or defense in a suit or action between parties sui juris is conclusively settled by the final judgment...

...the other ex delicto." In Southern Pacific Ed. Co. v. United States, 168 US 1, Justice Harlan says : "A right, question or fact distinctly put in issue...cannot be disputed in a subsequent suit between the Lamkin, Excr., v. Robinson et al. [32 OCA parties or their privies ; and even if the second suit is...

...accepted in Southern Pacific RR v. United States, 168 US 1. 48-49, is, that a question of fact or of law distinctly put in issue and directly determined by...of competent jurisdiction as a ground of recovery or defense in a suit or action between parties sui juris is conclusively settled by the final judgment...

...distinctly put in isene and directly determined by о < ourt of competent jurisdiction, as a ground i'f recovery, cannot be disputed in a subsequent suit between the same parties or their privies; and if the second suit is for a different cause of action, the right, question or fact once so determined...

...US, supra. ln the latter case it is said: "The general principle announced in numerous cases is that a right, question, or fact distinctly put in issue,...question, or fact once so determined must, as between the snme parties or their privies, be taken as conclusively established, so long as the judgment in the...

...English tribunals, but it must do so. For "the general principle announced in numerous cases is that a right, question, or fact distinctly put in issue...subsequent suit between the same parties or their privies." Southern Pacific RR v. United States, 168 US, at page 48, 18 Sup. Ct. 27, 42 L. Ed. 355. It is not...

...48, 18 Sup. Ct. 18, 27 (42 L. Ed. 355) : "The general principle announced in numerous cases is that a right, question, or fact distinctly put in issue...subsequent suit between the same parties or their pi-ivies ; and even if the second suit Is for a different cause of action, the right, question, or...

...1-48, 18 Sup. Ct. 27, it' is said that: "The general principle announced in numerous cases is that a right, question, or fact distinctly put in issue,...be disputed in a subsequent suit between the same parlies or their privies; and, even if the second suit is for a different cause of action, the right,...

...controversy between the parties. The rule is thus stated by the supreme court of the United States : "A right, question, or fact distinctly put In Issue,...cannot be disputed In a subsequent suit between the some parties; and even If the second suit Is for a different cause of action, the right, question,...