Opinion ID: 4196342
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The order in which the forums obtained

Text: jurisdiction. “We next consider the order in which the forums gained jurisdiction.” R.R. St., 656 F.3d at 980. We do not apply this factor mechanically, but instead consider “the realities of the case at hand” “in a pragmatic, flexible manner.” Moses H. Cone, 460 U.S. at 21. We consider not only the order, but also the relative progress of the state and federal proceedings. Am. Int’l Underwriters, 843 F.2d at 1257. This factor strongly favors a stay. When Montanore filed its action in federal court in June 2013, it had already been litigating the state case for six years. The parties had conducted extensive discovery, filed cross-motions for summary judgment, and the state court had issued an order deciding several issues in the case in March 2013. Since then, the Montana Supreme Court has decided two interlocutory appeals taken in the state case. Thus, not only did the state court obtain jurisdiction long before the federal court, but the state court proceedings had progressed significantly. Montanore “should . . . . be bound by its initial choice of the state forum, given the substantial progress that has occurred in the state court litigation.” Id. at 1259.