Asbestos Litigation

How courts have described this case

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

• rejecting defendant Raymark’s argument that parallel state court proceedings in Straf-ford required abstention by this Court on Colorado River grounds because it included a more complete array of defendants.
• “A risk of inconsistent results alone will not outweigh the heavy presumption against abstention. This is particularly true where [defendant] has not in fact been joined to the state action, and may never be if the federal court retains jurisdiction.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).