Document: 434 U.S. 12 98 S.Ct. 76 54 L.Ed.2d 199 GENERAL ATOMIC COMPANYv.Edwin L. FELTER, Judge, et al. No. 76-1640. Oct. 31, 1977. >>PER CURIAM. 1 The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. 2 General Atomic Co. (GAC) challenges the validity an injunction issued by New Mexico state court restraining it from filing and prosecuting actions against United Nuclear Corp. (UNC) in federal court. We reverse because under Donovan v. Dallas, 377 408, 84 1579, 409 (1964), not within power courts to bar litigants personam courts. 3 state-court was connection with one several lawsuits arising contracts entered into UNC various utility companies providing supply uranium. GAC subsequently succeeded UNC's rights obligations and, pursuant 1973 agreement, became obligated uranium required contracts. As result more than fivefold increase price between mid-1975, stopped delivery August 1975 filed declaratory judgment action District Court Santa Fe County, N. M., its constituent partners seeking avoid contract.1 In January 1976, interpleader complaint States four utilities determinations binding on all parties as their respective agreement utilities. dismissed motion defendants March 2, lack subject-matter jurisdiction.2 This dismissal, however, did conclude federal-court litigation. By early had brought following three proceedings GAC: (1) Indiana & Michigan Electric (I&M) (an damages specific performance Southern York); (2)Commonwealth Edison compel arbitration Northern Illinois); (3) Duke Power (a demand Western North Carolina). 4 On 15, UNC, after being warned I&M that might attempt implead York action, obtained ex parte temporary order " 'instituting suit or third-party [UNC].' "3 April hearing, preliminary broadly any original, third-party, relating subject matter lawsuit including party actions.4 Two previously were exempted injunction. Supreme granted alternative prohibition 14, staying enforcement Immediately oral argument, June 16, court, without opinion, quashed improvidently GAC's certiorari, vacated Court, remanded cause consider whether based upon grounds, both. 429 973, 97 479, 50 581 (1976). 5 Upon remand, opinion5 reaffirming prior sustaining ground issuance inherent equity jurisdiction prohibited supra. It thought applicable "where currently proceeding where further would be same issues events purpose harassment,"6 court's injunction, unlike adjudicated Donovan, "does directly indirectly affect district appellate has attached."7 Court's interpretation untenable direct conflict decision Supremacy Clause Constitution. 6 supra, plaintiff class sought construction airport runway municipal bonds purpose. After losing exhausting appeals, many named plaintiffs together group new raising substantially identical those already litigated similar relief. city Dallas moved dismiss favorable Texas Civil Appeals prohibiting members original prosecution pending 'filing instituting . litigation, law suits which contest revenue .' U.S., at 410, 1581. When city's some took appeal others second enjoin enforcing Subsequently, found contempt both who appealed action. review convictions sets held invalid "state are completely RESTRAIN FEDERAL-COURT PROCEEDINGS IN PERSONAM ACTIONS ." id., 413, 1582. Our holding premised fact right litigate Congress consequently, "cannot taken away State." Ibid. 7 clearly erred concluding precludes only enjoining attached time but permits injunctions additional ordered then-pending case but, "[t]here indication history this reached point vexatious harassing litigation," also authorized if concluded such "may filed."8 then forbade well actions; ensuing judgments punished continued court.9 reversed authorizing judgments. therefore clear conferred bring abridgment injunctions, regardless litigation prospective. 8 reject distinguish court10 harassment enjoinable. proceedings, expressly recognized "vexatious litigation." Indeed, presented compelling there could permitting proceedings. involved final deciding principal claims pressed adversely plaintiffs. Moreover, opinion pointed out, pendency effect rendering ineffective, provided while challenging pending. nevertheless overturned 9 There even less basis case. Here no judgment, since yet been tried. addition, opportunity fairly complex prejudiced allowed stand. What described "harassment' principally desire defend itself impleading utilities.11 This, course, something every do Fed.Rule Civ.Proc. 14 Federal Arbitration Act.12 pursue remedies take advantage procedures defenses may restricted here Donovan. fully capable preventing misuse purposes harassment. 10 reversed, inconsistent opinion. 11 so ordered. Mr. Justice BLACKMUN dispose summarily grant hear argument. 13 REHNQUIST, dissenting. holds lacks persons initiating duplicative courts, commenced While conclusion arguably supported portion ways contrary reasoning decision, undermines historic guard abuse judicial Because involves procedural rule application myriad situations, I believe should part re-examined. 15 Swift Wickham, 382 111, 116, 86 258, 261, 194 (1965), said: 16 "Unless inexorably commanded statute, principle importance kept books name stare decisis once proved unworkable practice; mischievous consequences alike perpetuation too great." 17 author particularly cognizant sensitive relationship See Younger Harris, 401 37, 91 746, 27 669 (1971); Atlantic Coast Line R. Locomotive Engineers, 298 281, 287, 90 1739, 26 234 (1970). implicates relationship, extend now does. 18 "general rule" interfere try restrain each other's proceedings." 412, Such general parity implies institution must have forbid initiation 19 Congress, enacting Anti-Injunction Act limiting authority stay State, 28 U.S.C. § 2283, excepted limitation necessary aid jurisdiction, protect effectuate judgments." Mitchum Foster, 407 225, 231-236, 92 2151, 32 705 (1972); Line, 294-296, 1739. Cf. Kline Burke Constr. Co., 260 226, 43 79, 67 L.Ed. 226 (1922). If saw fit create exception "[l]egislative policy [which] expressed clearcut prohibition," Clothing Workers Richman Bros. 348 511, 516, 75 452, 455, 99 600 (1955), intended deny limited injunctive jurisdiction. Neither Art. VI Constitution congressional grants way militate possess they acquired undercut nullified later instituted other 20 Unlike Appeals, enjoined specifically excepting two begun petitioner partners. Any ambiguity wording regard authoritatively resolved Mexico, held: "The directed towards future wherein acquire jurisdiction." N.M. 120, 124, 560 P.2d 541, 545 (1977). existence foreclosed though vacating citation initiated subsequent order, necessarily lacked instance. There, interfering maintain. involving respondent multitude separate different does seek his proceed suit. 21 acted consistently affirm judgment. removed entire 1441(c), December 1975, voluntary nonsuit 41(a)(1)(i). day virtually previous one, except defendant. Tenth Circuit affirmed dismissal 8, 553 F.2d 53. 23, Gulf Oil Corp., partners, concerning release certain it. September 29, issue decided Pet. Cert. 9-10. originally applied 19, prevent UNC. denied. "IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED Company, privies, agents, servants employees, hereby preliminarily Corporation forum rights, prohibits ordinary third cross-claims, method manner actions, demands lawsuit, thereto. However, Corporation, Cause 76-032-B, operation before al., 76-1152. herein defendant shall bind Plaintiff terms." App. 3a-4a. 541 Id., 123, P.2d, 544. 545. statement factually accurate. n. 11, infra. Dixon, Tex., 365 S.W.2d 919, 927 (1963). 410-411, 1579; Brown, 368 240 (Tex.Civ.App.1963). apparently ignored long 2. prevented issuance. succeed obtaining joined surrendering disputes forum. Civ. 881 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 5, 1977). asserting provision Commonwealth issuance, Commonwealth's Seventh affirmed. 400 F.Supp. 888 (N.D.Ill.1975), aff'd, 1263 Carolina refused despite contention indispensable acknowledged, proper proceeding. 420 215 F.2d, 56, 58, exposed substantial risk adjudications For example, fears arbitrators find deliver contract prices, hold, contrary, excuse contingent contractual Commonwealth. 20-22. seq. impossible, foresee occasions during course justifiably assert

Category: 9