American Life Insurance v. Stewart

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that, to preclude equitable remedies, proposed legal alternative “cannot be adequate if its adequacy depends upon the will of the opposing party” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• noting that “[i]n the exercise of a sound discretion [a court] may hold one lawsuit in abeyance to abide the outcome of another, especially where the par ties and the issues are the same.”
• respectively quoting Davis v. Wakelee, 156 U.S. 680, 688, 15 S.Ct. 555, 558, 39 L.Ed. 578 (1895), and Bank of Kentucky v. Stone, 88 F. 383, 391 (D.Ky.1898)
• “Where equity can give relief plaintiff ought not to be compelled to speculate upon the chance of his obtaining relief at law.”
• \[T]he settled rule is that equitable jurisdiction existing at the filing of a bill is not destroyed because an adequate legal remedy may have become available thereafter.\
• case for stay pendente lite is clearest “where the parties and the issues are the same” in the two cases

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).