Legal Opinion
Chapman v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided June 23, 2011No. 10-15215PublishedCited by 79 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
2Per curiam
“Where concurrent proceedings in state and federal court are both suits in rem or quasi in rem, the court first assuming jurisdiction over the property may maintain and exercise that jurisdiction to the exclusion of the other.” Knaefler v. Mack, 680 F.2d 671, 675 (9th Cir.1982) (footnote omitted). The property at issue in this quiet title action was also the subject of a previously filed unlawful detainer action that was proceeding concurrently in state court. In order to decide whether the federal District Court properly exercised jurisdiction over this action, we must determine whether…
3Cases cited40 opinions
- Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Salve Regina College v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Kline v. Burke Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1922
- McClellan v. CarlandSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by79 opinions
- Nevada v. Bank of America Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Esperanza Corral v. Select Portfolio ServicingCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- Urbino v. Orkin Servs. of California, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- Jose Mondragon v. Capital One Auto FinanceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- Hawaii Ex Rel. Louie v. HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
74 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.