context: However, before the doctrine may be applied in administrative proceedings, it must appear that the first agency to address the claim in question had jurisdiction to resolve that claim.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.parenthetical: doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel do not apply if agency lacks jurisdiction to grant relief requested
citation_a.sentence: See Peterkin v. Industrial Commission, 698 P.2d 1353 (Colo.App.1985), aff'd on other grounds, 729 P.2d 977 (Colo. 1986) (doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel do not apply if agency lacks jurisdiction to grant relief requested); see also Maryland Casualty Co. v. Messina, 874 P.2d 1058 (Colo.1994) (doctrine of collateral estop-pel does not apply if agency implicitly resolves a factual issue which is unnecessary for determination of claim before it).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.parenthetical: doctrine of collateral estop-pel does not apply if agency implicitly resolves a factual issue which is unnecessary for determination of claim before it
citation_b.sentence: See Peterkin v. Industrial Commission, 698 P.2d 1353 (Colo.App.1985), aff'd on other grounds, 729 P.2d 977 (Colo. 1986) (doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel do not apply if agency lacks jurisdiction to grant relief requested); see also Maryland Casualty Co. v. Messina, 874 P.2d 1058 (Colo.1994) (doctrine of collateral estop-pel does not apply if agency implicitly resolves a factual issue which is unnecessary for determination of claim before it).