Is the Due Process Clause violated by a rule that permits plaintiffs to invoke a prior jury's findings to establish elements of their claims without showing that those elements were actually decided in their favor in the prior proceeding, based merely on the fact that the defendant had an opportunity to be heard on those issues in the prior proceeding and the possibility that the relevant issues might have been decided in the plaintiffs' favor in that proceeding?

QUESTION PRESENTED This case presents the same question as the petitions for writs of certiorari filed November 19, 2018 in R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Searcy and Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Boatright: Is the Due Process Clause violated by a rule that permits plaintiffs to invoke a prior jury’s findings to establish elements of their claims without showing that those elements were actually decided in their favor in the prior proceeding, based merely on the fact that the defendant had an opportunity to be heard on those issues in the prior proceeding and the possibility that the relevant issues might have been decided in the plaintiffs’ favor in that proceeding?