United States v. Hammad

How courts have described this case

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

• considering eighth factor but clarifying it is only considered by “some courts”
• corporation, holding company and board of directors are “so closely affiliated” that doctrine applies
• \Plaintiffs cannot avoid application of the Colorado River doctrine simply by adding additional parties in the federal suit-especially when the additional parties are so closely affiliated with the defendant present in both cases.\
• “Here, duplication of proceedings is almost certain to occur, as the issues being litigated in state court mirror those before the court in this action, and both cases rely on the same factual and legal assertions.”
• “Here, duplication of proceedings is almost certain to occur, as the issues being litigated in state court mirror those before the court in this action, and both cases rely on the same factual and legal assertions.”
• “[D]uplication of proceedings is almost certain to occur, as the issues being litigated in state court mirror those before the court in this action. . . . [T]he issues and factual circumstances in both cases are nearly identical.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).