What legal doctrine may prevent a motorcyclist from suing a truck driver after previously settling with another party?

The correct doctrine that may prevent a motorcyclist from suing a truck driver after previously settling with another party is the principle of claim preclusion. This doctrine serves to prevent parties from relitigating the same claim or any claims arising from the same transaction after they have reached a final judgment on the merits in a prior lawsuit.

In this case, if the motorcyclist has already settled with another party related to the same incident involving the truck driver, claim preclusion would apply. This means the motorcyclist cannot bring a new case against the truck driver because the settlement likely resolves all related claims that stem from the same accident or incident. The rationale behind this is to promote finality and judicial efficiency, ensuring that once a matter has been resolved, it is not subject to repeated litigation.

Other options do not apply in this scenario: collateral estoppel pertains to preventing re-litigation of issues already determined in a prior case, jurisdictional immunity relates to the scope of a court's authority to hear a case, and res judicata is often used interchangeably with claim preclusion but is typically broader, referring not just to claims but also including a final judgment in a different case. In this specific context, claim preclusion directly addresses the situation of