Citation network
Gulfstream Aerospace Vs. Mayacamas
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Mar 22, 1988
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 271 (1988) U.S. Supreme Court Gulfstream Aerospace v. MayacamasSearch
-
U.S. 271 (1988) Gulfstream Aerospace Corp. v. MayacamasSearch
-
fell short of those necessary to justify the requested discontinuance under Colorado River Water Conservation Dist. v. UnitedSearch
-
a)(1). Petitioner's claim that the order is appealable pursuant to the doctrine of Enelow v. NewSearch
-
York Life Ins. Co., 293 U. S. 379 , and Ettelson v. MetropolitanSearch
-
stay or dismissal of the federal court action pursuant to the doctrine of Colorado River Water Conservation Dist. v. UnitedSearch
-
Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. MercurySearch
-
Catlin v. UnitedSearch
-
indeed, the order ensures that litigation will continue in the District Court. In Cohen v. BeneficialSearch
-
See Coopers & Lybrand v. LivesaySearch
-
Richardson-Merrell Inc. v. KollerSearch
-
Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. RisjordSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Coopers & Lybrand v. LivesaySearch
-
This Court held in Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. MercurySearch
-
id. at 460 U. S. 12 , n. 14, quoting Coopers & Lybrand v. LivesaySearch
-
U.S. at 460 U. S. 12 , n. 14. We used the order challenged in Coopers & Lybrand v. LivesaySearch
-
Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. MercurySearch
-
International Products Corp. v. KoonsSearch
-
The line of cases we must examine to resolve this claim began some 50 years ago, when this Court decided Enelow v. NewSearch
-
a)(1). In Ettelson v. MetropolitanSearch
-
Enelow-Ettelson rule, most recently restated in Baltimore Page 485 U. S. 281 Contractors, Inc. v. BodingerSearch
-
States Court of Appeals for the Page 485 U. S. 282 Seventh Circuit in Microsoftware Computer Systems, Inc. v. OntelSearch
-
and its consequent tendency to produce incongruous results. Baltimore Contractors, Inc. v. BodingerSearch
-
Morgantown v. RoyalSearch
-
Beaunit Mills, Inc. v. EdaySearch
-
Danford v. SchwabacherSearch
-
Diematic Manufacturing Corp. v. PackagingSearch
-
Shanferoke Coal & Supply Corp. v. WestchesterSearch
-
an arbitration agreement and, correlatively, could not have stayed a suit at law pending arbitration. See Olson v. PaineSearch
-
the completion of administrative proceedings is based on an equitable defense. Compare H. W. Caldwell & Son, Inc. v. UnitedSearch
-
States ex rel. John H. Moon & Sons, Inc., 407 F.2d 21, 22 (CA5 1969), with Pepper v. MianiSearch
-
rule's focus on historical distinctions thus produces arbitrary and anomalous results. See Baltimore Contractors, Inc. v. BodingerSearch
-
Hartford Financial Systems, Inc. v. FloridaSearch
-
New England Power Co. v. AsiaticSearch
-
Judge has urged his court to reject Page 485 U. S. 287 the doctrine outright. See Mar-Len of Louisiana, Inc. v. Parsons-GilbaneSearch
-
of the doctrine and concluded only with great reluctance that repudiating the doctrine would be improper. Olson v. PaineSearch
-
Carson v. AmericanSearch
-
Brands, Inc., 450 U. S. 79 , 450 U. S. 84 (1981), quoting Baltimore Contractors, Inc. v. BodingerSearch
-
that the writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, to be reserved for extraordinary situations. See, e.g., Kerr v. UnitedSearch
-
Roche v. EvaporatedSearch
-
will justify issuance of the writ. Will v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 389 U. S. 90 , 389 U. S. 95 (1967), quoting De Beers Consol. Mines, Ltd. v. UnitedSearch
-
Bankers Life & Cas. Co. v. HollandSearch
-
U. S. 379 , 346 U. S. 384 (1953), quoting United States v. DuellSearch
-
Court's order denying a stay or dismissal of the federal court suit warranted the issuance of a writ of mandamus. v. TheSearch
-
relative comprehensiveness, convenience, and progress of the state court and federal court actions. See, e.g., Arizona v. SanSearch
-
resolution of a state court proceeding is not immediately appealable), with Microsoftware Computer Systems, Inc. v. OntelSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial