20 Cited authorities

Moses H. Cone Hosp. v. Mercury Constr. Corp.
460 U.S. 1 (1983) Cited 11,908 times 47 Legal Analyses
Holding stay order appealable under § 1291 where it put the litigant "effectively out of court," and "surrender[ed] jurisdiction of a federal suit to a state court"
Colorado River Water Cons. Dist. v. U.S.
424 U.S. 800 (1976) Cited 8,186 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding that, in limited circumstances, federal courts should abstain from deciding a case when there are related proceedings pending in state court
Matsushita Elec. Industrial Co. v. Epstein
516 U.S. 367 (1996) Cited 527 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Exchange Act's exclusive-jurisdiction provision sought "to achieve greater uniformity of construction and more effective and expert application of that law"
Ambrosia Coal and Const. v. Pagés Morales
368 F.3d 1320 (11th Cir. 2004) Cited 224 times
Holding that, in that instance, abstention was not appropriate
Nakash v. Marciano
882 F.2d 1411 (9th Cir. 1989) Cited 342 times
Holding suits to be parallel where federal action is but a "spin-off" of more comprehensive state litigation
In re Countrywide Financial Corp. Derivative Litigation
542 F. Supp. 2d 1160 (C.D. Cal. 2008) Cited 135 times
Finding that the "nonidentity of the named class representatives should in no way undermine a court's determination that the suits in question are otherwise parallel" where "both putative classes [were] identically composed of Countrywide common-stock holders" (quoting Romine, 160 F.3d at 340)
General Elec. Co. by Levit v. Cathcart
980 F.2d 927 (3d Cir. 1992) Cited 113 times
Holding that "the mere fact that omissions in proxy materials, by permitting directors to win re-election, indirectly lead to financial loss through mismanagement will not create a sufficient nexus with the alleged monetary loss"
Millenco v. meVC Draper Fisher Jurvetson Fund
824 A.2d 11 (Del. Ch. 2002) Cited 20 times
Holding that it is material for stockholders to know the interconnected relationships of independent and insider directors when the insider director has de jure and de facto control over the independent directors at another entity
Medema v. Medema Builders, Inc.
854 F.2d 210 (7th Cir. 1988) Cited 36 times
Recognizing that the Colorado River doctrine is necessary to "ensure judicial economy and deter abusive `reactive' litigation"
E. & J. Gallo Winery v. Encana Energy Services, Inc.
388 F. Supp. 2d 1148 (E.D. Cal. 2005) Cited 11 times
Concluding that "it would be unfair in the extreme" and "forum-shopping at its most wasteful" to allow a party to transfer the case after two years of discovery and motion practice
Section 78n - Proxies
15 U.S.C. § 78n Cited 1,623 times 19 Legal Analyses
Incorporating § 78m(d) by reference
Section 78cc - Validity of contracts
15 U.S.C. § 78cc Cited 539 times 8 Legal Analyses
Providing that any contractual "provision binding any person to waive compliance with any provision of this chapter or of any rule or regulation thereunder, or of any rule of a self-regulatory organization, shall be void "

Willa Rosenbloom v. David E I Pyott et al

20 Cited authorities

Holding stay order appealable under § 1291 where it put the litigant "effectively out of court," and "surrender[ed] jurisdiction of a federal suit to a state court"

Holding that, in limited circumstances, federal courts should abstain from deciding a case when there are related proceedings pending in state court

Holding that the Exchange Act's exclusive-jurisdiction provision sought "to achieve greater uniformity of construction and more effective and expert application of that law"

Holding that, in that instance, abstention was not appropriate

Holding suits to be parallel where federal action is but a "spin-off" of more comprehensive state litigation

Finding that the "nonidentity of the named class representatives should in no way undermine a court's determination that the suits in question are otherwise parallel" where "both putative classes [were] identically composed of Countrywide common-stock holders" (quoting Romine, 160 F.3d at 340)

Holding that "the mere fact that omissions in proxy materials, by permitting directors to win re-election, indirectly lead to financial loss through mismanagement will not create a sufficient nexus with the alleged monetary loss"

Holding that it is material for stockholders to know the interconnected relationships of independent and insider directors when the insider director has de jure and de facto control over the independent directors at another entity

Recognizing that the Colorado River doctrine is necessary to "ensure judicial economy and deter abusive `reactive' litigation"

Concluding that "it would be unfair in the extreme" and "forum-shopping at its most wasteful" to allow a party to transfer the case after two years of discovery and motion practice

Incorporating § 78m(d) by reference

Providing that any contractual "provision binding any person to waive compliance with any provision of this chapter or of any rule or regulation thereunder, or of any rule of a self-regulatory organization, shall be void "