Lotus Notes is trying to kill me.

Stab it while it's busy synchronizing.

Wolfram, not sure how Maryland law would affect the matter, but what stands out to me:

You say there was no personal service in the eviction lawsuit. Does that mean that your client didn't have the opportunity to defend the action? General res judicata principles require that the party against whom the judgment is used must have had an opportunity to argue the claim in the first lawsuit. (BTW, res judicata is now often called "issue preclusion." So you might want to look for that phrase in your research.)

Another thought is, if landlord could have raised the damages issues in the first lawsuit and didn't, there may be a claim preclusion defense there.

Of course, specific states may have laws that lead to different conclusions.

(ETA: And after reading the other responses, I join the comments on incentive.)

God, this sounds like a property/civ. pro. exam.

That's what it was for me. ;) I think there are more criteria than just those two, but that's what came to mind. Like bon bon said, I think you will have to argue that the client didn't have the incentive, etc.

eta: so relieved to see that the real lawyers said the same thing.

Off the top of my head, I think Landlord can only use res judicata here if your client had a full opportunity and incentive to litigate this issue last time, which it doesn't sound like he/she did.

This is what I thought too, particulary the incentive part. Why should he litigate a landlord/tenant possession action on a property he hasn't had possession of in almost 3 years? But I can't find that incentive requirement spelled out anywhere.

Wolfram, can I ask a question as a non-lawyer?

What is the landlord upset about? He knew when your clients left, and he's been getting paid rent. Presumably, he could increase the rent with the new owners of the business should he so desire. Why is he suing?

TAR: I didn't get a chance to see all of the cbs.com insider videos this morning, but just from the clip blurbs, it looked like Brian and Greg got lost twice, in addition to getting distracted at the first water tower. That had to have added at least a half hour onto their lag time, and it looked like that was a half hour they were never going to get back. Too bad, 'cause I loved those dorks !

Why is he suing?

Maybe because he's a wanker?

Is morning. Right?

Here, is afternoon. But was morning. Or so they claimed.

Maybe because he's a wanker?

This was my guess. But I'm not a lawyer.

Much healthma to Jeff.

Timelies and birthdays! Has it really been a year, Susan?

Amazing, isn't it? When I think about where we were last year compared to now, how exhausted and overwhelmed and just plain wrecked I was, and now here I am, doing just fine, with Annabel, who's just as beautiful, smart, and happy a baby as anyone could wish for...amazing is the only word for it.

Thanks for all the birthday wishes! I was just coming here to post that it was her birthday, and y'all were already there.