What is the consequence of a second dismissal operating as an adjudication on the merits for a consumer suing a bank?

When a case is dismissed with prejudice after a second dismissal, it generally operates as an adjudication on the merits, which bars the plaintiff from bringing another lawsuit based on the same underlying claim. This principle is rooted in the legal doctrine of res judicata, which aims to promote finality in litigation and prevent parties from being harassed by repeated lawsuits over the same issue.

In the context of a consumer suing a bank, if the consumer's case is dismissed twice with prejudice, they will be unable to file a new lawsuit for the same claim due to the finality of the adjudication. This serves to protect defendants, in this case, the bank, from having to defend against the same claim multiple times, which would waste judicial resources and undermine the fairness of the legal process.

The other options do not fit the context of a subsequent dismissal. For instance, appealing the first decision (one of the other choices) is not possible if both dismissals were with prejudice, because there would be no standing claim to appeal from. Similarly, the bank reopening the case or the consumer collecting double damages would not apply in this situation, as the finality of a merit-based dismissal means the issue is resolved once and for all.