03-1391 Menard Inc. v. Liteway Lighting Products

Listen to this article

“Liteway initially sued for nonpayment of certain invoices for goods shipped. Menard now tries to claim that in connection with these invoices, it returned a portion of the items. However, both the shipment and return of goods are part of a single transaction. The common ‘nucleus of operative facts’ is the exchange of goods for payment. The transaction will be complete when Menard no longer has a balance due and owing. This will occur either when Menard pays the bill or when it returns items and receives credit. We decline to break a sales transaction into multiple components and label each a new event.”

Accordingly, because defendant’s counterclaims and defenses could have been raised in the first action, the doctrine of claim preclusion bars this action.

Judgment and order reversed.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

Dist III, Eau Claire County, Stark, J., Hoover, P.J.

Attorneys:

For Appellant: Carol S. Dittmar, Eau Claire; Teresa E. O’Halloran, Eau Claire

For Respondent: Stephanie L. Finn, Eau Claire; Jay E. Heit, Eau Claire