concurrent jurisdiction
Definitions from Case Law · United States Supreme Court
Definitions from Case Law
From 368 U.S. 502 - Charles Dowd Box Co. v. Courtney · 1962Most cited · 1,704 citing opinions
Concurrent jurisdiction has been a common phenomenon in our judicial history, and exclusive federal court jurisdiction over cases arising under federal law has been the exception rather than the rule.
How the Supreme Court has restated “concurrent jurisdiction”
Each Supreme Court definition of “concurrent jurisdiction,” sized by how often later courts cited it. “Change” is measured by wording overlap with earlier definitions — a rough signal, not a semantic judgment.
How often courts cite the cases defining “concurrent jurisdiction”
Court decisions citing the 7 opinions that defined “concurrent jurisdiction” — 3,786 in all, by decade. Counts are citations to the defining cases as a whole, not verified uses of the term. The dip in the most recent years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the latest years.
All 7 definitions, chronological · 1824–1962
- ORIGINAL
In all cases of concurrent jurisdiction, the Court which first has possession of the subject must decide it... Were a Court of equity, in a case of concurrent jurisdiction, to try a cause already tried at law, without the addition of any equitable circumstance to give jurisdiction, it would act as an appellate Court, to affirm or reverse a judgment already rendered, on the same circumstances, by a competent tribunal. This is not the province of a Court of Chancery.
first possessor decides
There is no principle better settled, than that, where two or more tribunals have a concurrent jurisdiction over the same subject-matter and the parties, a suit commenced in any one of them may be pleaded in abatement to an action for the same cause in any other.
prior pending suit
Controversies, in order that they may be cognizable under that clause of the section, either in the Circuit or District Court, must have respect to some property or rights of property of the bankrupt transferable to or vested in such assignee, and the suit, whether it be a suit at law or in equity, must be in the name of one of the two parties described in that clause and against the other. All three of those conditions must concur to give the jurisdiction.
Bankrupt Act, third clause
The rule is well recognized that the pendency of an action in the state court is no bar to proceedings concerning the same matter in the Federal court having jurisdiction, for both the state and Federal courts have certain concurrent jurisdiction over such controversies, and when they arise between citizens of different states the Federal jurisdiction may be invoked, and the cause carried to judgment, notwithstanding a state court may also have taken jurisdiction of the same case.
state and federal courts
The rule that where the same matter is brought before courts of concurrent jurisdiction, the one first obtaining jurisdiction will retain it until the controversy is determined, to the entire exclusion of the other, and will maintain and protect its jurisdiction by an appropriate injunction, is confined in its operation to instances where both suits are substantially the same; that is to say, where there is substantial identity in the interests represented, in the rights asserted, and in the purposes sought.
rule of prior jurisdiction
The federal right is enforceable in a state court whenever its ordinary jurisdiction as prescribed by local laws is appropriate to the occasion and is invoked in conformity with those laws. The grant of concurrent jurisdiction implies that, in the first instance, the plaintiff shall have the choice of the court. As an incident, he is entitled to whatever remedial advantage inheres in the particular forum.