Opinion ID: 40586
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Avoidance of Piecemeal Litigation

Text: 15 The pendency of an action in state court does not bar a federal court from considering the same matter. Bank One, N.A., 288 F.3d at 185. While duplicative litigation is permitted, Colorado River prevents piecemeal litigation, and the concomitant danger of inconsistent rulings with respect to a piece of property. Black Sea Inv. v. United Heritage Corp., 204 F.3d 647, 650-51. Again, no property is at issue in this case. The potential, however, does exist for some piecemeal litigating as the state court is the only forum hearing the breach of fiduciary duty claims and claims against Dunn. For the remaining issues, a plea of res judicata after the completion of one suit could eliminate the problem of inconsistent judgments. Kelly Inv., 315 F.3d at 498. Nonetheless, as the litigation presently exists, the third factor favors abstention. 5 16