Stare decisis is the doctrine of precedent.

Courts cite to stare decisis when an issue has

been previously brought to the court and a ruling already issued. Generally, courts will
adhere to the previous ruling, though this is not universally true. See, e.g. Planned
Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 US 833. Stare decisis is Latin for to
stand by things decided. The doctrine operates both horizontally and vertically. Horizontal
stare decisis refers to a court adhering to its own precedent. A court engages in vertical
stare decisis when it applies precedent from a higher court. Consequently, stare
decisis discourages litigating established precedents, and thus, reduces spending.
Ratio decidendi (plural rationes decidendi) is a Latin phrase meaning the reason for the
decision. Ratio decidendi refers to the legal, moral, political and social principles on which a
courts decision rests. It is the rationale for reaching the decision of a case. It is binding on
lower courts through the principle of Stare decisis. Ratio decidendi is a helpful tool for a
lawyer.
Ratio is a ruling on a point of law and the decision on a point of law depends on facts of a
case. Culling out ratio from a judgment is difficult. A thorough reading of an entire judgment
is required to identify a ratio. Ration decidendi can be determined or identified in the
following ways:
By distinguishing material facts from unimportant facts.
By discovering the precedents applied to identify the courts approach.
By restricting analysis to the majority opinions.
By reading out subsequent decisions and considering it at several levels.
Res judicata
Literally "a matter judged", res judicata is the principle that a matter may not, generally, be
relitigated once it has been judged on the merits.
Res judicata encompasses limits on both the claims and the issues that may be raised in
subsequent proceedings:
Claim preclusion is the principle once a cause of action has been litigated, it may not be
relitigated.
Bar: A losing plaintiff is barred from re-suing a winning defendant on the same cause of
action. (Scenario: Plaintiff P unsuccessfully sues Defendant D on Cause of action C. P may
not try for better luck by initiating a new lawsuit against D on C.)
Merger: A winning plaintiff may not re-sue a losing defendant. (Scenario: P successfully sues
D on C. P may not again sue D on C to try to recover more damages.)
Issue preclusion (Collateral estoppel): Once an issue of fact has been determined in a
proceeding between two parties, the parties may not relitigate that issue even in a
proceeding on a different cause of action. (Scenario: P sues D on C. P sues D on C1. Element
E, which was determined in the first trial, is common to C and C1. At the second trial, P and
D cannot attempt to get a different disposition of E.)
The law of the case is a legal term of art that is applicable mainly in common law, or AngloAmerican, jurisdictions that recognize the related doctrine of stare decisis. The phrase refers
to instances where "rulings made by a trial court and not challenged on appeal become the
law of the case." [1] "Unless the trial court's rulings were clearly in error or there has been
an important change in circumstances, the court's prior rulings must stand." [2] Usually the
situation occurs when either a case is on appeal for the second timee.g. if the reviewing
court remanded the matter to the trial court and the party appeals again or if the case was

appealed in a higher appellate courtfor example, from an appellate court to the highest
court.