Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Foremost-Mckesson, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• deciding that when two courts may interpret insurance policy language differently, thereby prejudicing one party, abstention is warranted under Colorado River
• finding an exceptional basis where there existed a “real possibility” that an insurance policy might be interpreted differently in each forum, leaving the insured with insufficient coverage after years of paying premiums
• finding it significant that \no federal issues are raised . . . and no federal interest would be served by retaining jurisdiction over the case\
• finding it significant that “[n]o federal issues [were] raised ... and no federal interest would be served by retaining jurisdiction over the case.”
• finding an exceptional basis where there existed a \real possibility\ that an insurance policy might be interpreted differently in each forum, leaving the insured with insufficient coverage after years of paying premiums
• declaratory judgment as to rights and obligations under liability insurance policies in Massachusetts district court stayed in favor of California state court proceedings under Colorado River and Moses H. Cone

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).