| |
| | [No title] (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-31) |
 | | Similarly, where complex cases are sufficiently developed, mere exercise of parallel jurisdiction by the state court may present enough of a threat to the jurisdiction of the federal court to justify issuance of an injunction. |
 | | See Baldwin-United, 770 F.2d at 337 (noting such cases, like cases in rem, are ones in which "it is intolerable to have conflicting orders from different courts") (quoting 17 Charles Alan Wright, Arthur R. Miller & Edward H. Cooper, Federal Practice and Procedure, S 4225, at 105 n.8 (Supp. |
 | | What is ultimately important, in any event, is that in both kinds of cases state actions over the same subject matter have the potential to "so interfer[e] with a federal court's consideration or disposition of a case as to seriously impair the federal court's flexibility and authority to decide the case." Atl. |
| vls.law.vill.edu /Locator/3d/Mar2002/001393.txt (8272 words) |
|