Summary

Portrait of Morrison Waite Morrison Waite Litchfield v. Crane — Opinion of the Court

But to give full effect to the principle by which parties are held bound by a judgment, all persons who are represented by the parties and claim under them, or in privity with them, are equally concluded by the same proceedings. We have already seen that the term 'privity' denotes mutual or successive relationship to the same rights of property. The ground, therefore, upon which persons standing in this relation to the litigating party are bound by the proceedings to which he was a party is that they are identified with him in interest
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Morrison Waite Morrison Waite Litchfield v. Crane — Opinion of the Court

Greenleaf, in his treatise on the Law of Evidence, vol. 1, § 523, states the rule applicable to this class of cases thus: 'Under the term parties, in this connection, the law includes all who are directly interested in the subjectmatter, matter, and had a right to make defense, or to control the proceedings, and to appeal from the judgment. This right involves also the right to adduce testimony, and to cross-examine the witnesses adduced on the other side. Persons not having these rights are regarded as strangers to the cause.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Morrison Waite Morrison Waite Litchfield v. Crane — Opinion of the Court

Hence, all privies, whether in estate, in blood, or in law, are estopped from litigating that which is conclusive on him with whom they are in privity.' The correctness of this statement has been often affirmed by this court, (Lovejoy v. Murray, 3 Wall. 1, 19; Robbins v. Chicago, 4 Wall. 657, 673;) and the principle has been recognized in many cases; indeed, it is elementary, (Hale v. Finch, 104 U.S. 261, 265; Railroad Co. v. Bank, 102 U.S. 14, 22; Butterfield v. Smith, 101 U.S. 570.)
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature