The Proper Role of Res Judicata and Collateral Estoppel in Title VII Suits

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 involves an intricate and overlapping range of state and federal enforcement procedures. It is possible that each employment discrimination charge will be heard in 4 separate forums: a state administrative agency, a state court, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), and finally, a federal court. A critical issue raised by overlapping jurisdictional provisions is the weight, if any, that one forum must give to a prior determination rendered in another. The courts of appeals have established a blanket rule that permits a second, independent federal action even though the identical claims have been litigated in a state forum. It is suggested that the appropriate answer lies between the positions adopted by the courts of appeals. The full faith and credit clause, made applicable to the federal courts by Congress in Section 1738 of Title 28 of the United States Code, title VII's legislative history, and the policies of efficiency and consistency on which preclusion doctrines are founded all have significant roles in defining the appropriate solution. Provided that the state's fair employment practices laws parallel Title VII, the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel should preclude relitigation of claims and issues that were or could have been fully and fairly litigated in a state proceeding.