In which scenario would a second action not be barred due to a different claim?

The correct choice indicates a scenario involving a writer and publisher entering into a contract, where a second action would not be barred due to a different claim. This scenario illustrates the principle of claim preclusion, which holds that a final judgment on the merits in one case prevents the parties from relitigating the same claim in a subsequent case.

In contract disputes like the one between a writer and a publisher, the underlying relationship typically involves distinct contractual rights and obligations. If a writer were to have multiple claims arising from the contract, such as breach of contract and a claim for specific performance, these claims could be pursued separately in different legal actions if they are based on separate factual grounds or different contractual provisions. Thus, it is possible for new claims to emerge that do not relate directly to the resolution of the initial claim, allowing a second action without being barred.

The other scenarios involve relationships or claims that are likely more connected or overlapping, making it more probable for a second action to be barred due to the doctrine preventing relitigation of the same claim or issues. For example, breach of contract claims or malpractice claims typically follow legal principles that may interlink or share fundamental elements, which can result in a stricter application of claim preclusion. In