Pending separate lawsuits do not defeat the finality of a judgment in one action

Evidence

Zelis complained that entry of judgment in this action was improper because there are other lawsuits still pending between the parties; this contention is a non sequitur since the existence of other pending actions does not affect the finality of this one, or alter the fact that Zelis stipulated to entry of judgment in this action. — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1153

Categorization

• DEFINE: Demonstrates the legal term ‘non sequitur’ applied concretely: an argument whose conclusion does not follow from its premises.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1153
• XREF: connects to: Geographic separation does not prove noninfringing status under patent law — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 860