13 Cited authorities

  1. Colorado River Water Cons. Dist. v. U.S.

    424 U.S. 800 (1976)   Cited 7,200 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, in limited circumstances, federal courts should abstain from deciding a case when there are related proceedings pending in state court
  2. Romine v. Compuserve Corporation

    160 F.3d 337 (6th Cir. 1998)   Cited 260 times
    Holding that where in the state court depositions were taken, discovery requests and thousands of documents were exchanged, the state court has placed the case on its complex administrative track, and defendants have moved for summary judgment, and the federal action were still in the initial pleading stage, the "progress" factor weighed strongly in favor of deferring to the state court
  3. Penn Co. v. Pennsylvania

    294 U.S. 189 (1935)   Cited 370 times
    Holding federal court had jurisdiction over first-filed federal suit
  4. Madruga v. Superior Court

    346 U.S. 556 (1954)   Cited 186 times
    Holding that an admiralty action was permissible in diversity where "it does not affect the interests of others in the world at large, as it would if this were a proceeding in rem to enforce a lien"
  5. U.S. v. Bank of New York Co.

    296 U.S. 463 (1936)   Cited 226 times
    Holding first-filed state cases took precedence over later-filed federal cases
  6. Pennsylvania v. Williams

    294 U.S. 176 (1935)   Cited 230 times
    Holding that the district court erred in exercising jurisdiction over a shareholder's complaint seeking the liquidation of a Pennsylvania corporation, because state statutes established a mechanism for the shareholder to achieve the same results
  7. McGinness v. U.S.

    90 F.3d 143 (6th Cir. 1996)   Cited 96 times
    Holding that "[t]he United States, as a sovereign, cannot be sued for damages without its prior consent, and the terms of its consent define the court's subject matter jurisdiction."
  8. Harkin v. Brundage

    276 U.S. 36 (1928)   Cited 184 times
    In Harkin v. Brundage, 276 U.S. 36, 48 S.Ct. 268, 72 L.Ed. 457, the court held that jurisdiction of the Federal court [(D.C.) 13 F.2d 617] was invoked through the practice of fraud by the moving litigant and therefore must be surrendered.
  9. In re Chimenti

    79 F.3d 534 (6th Cir. 1996)   Cited 51 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding that “admiralty and maritime claims are not removable to federal court unless there exists some independent basis, such as diversity of the parties, for federal jurisdiction.”
  10. Park National Bank v. Cattani

    2010 Ohio 1291 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 16 times
    In Cattani, Park National Bank filed a complaint to foreclose on a mortgage on real property consisting of a gas station, convenience store and fast-food restaurant.