Connell v. Vermilya-Brown Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that some level of duplication is always present in parallel litigations and more is needed to determine whether abstention is appropriate
• noting the risk of conflicting outcomes is inherent in any case involving parallel proceedings
• abstention inappropriate where, among other factors, “dismissal of federal action would presumably leave six defendants free from any proceeding on the issues in question”
• abstention inappropriate where the federal action was for theft of computer data and wrongful eviction while the state action was for breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty
• abstention “more appropriate” under this factor when the parties to the actions are not identical
• “Before engaging in the six-factor analysis, a court must make a threshold determination that the federal and state court cases are ‘parallel.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).