Dynex Capital Inc. v. Quilling

In this decades-long dispute arising from breach-of-contract litigation against the plaintiff, the court will abstain from exercising jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s claim for declaratory judgment, due to litigation already pending in Texas state court.

First, Texas has a greater interest in adjudicating the matter. The related litigation has been ongoing in Texas state and federal courts for two decades, and the outcome of the case will affect a Texas state court judgment for $47 million. Second, this action may result in piecemeal litigation in a way that resolving the dispute in Texas state court would not, making the latter venue more efficient. Third, because both actions center on the same issue, unnecessary entanglement may occur between this court and the Texas state court. Finally, circumstances suggest that the plaintiff was forum shopping when it filed the current action.

Accordingly, the court will invoke its substantial discretion to abstain from exercising jurisdiction.

Motion to dismiss granted.

Dynex Capital Inc. v. Quilling, No. 3:18cv332, Mar. 29, 2019. EDVA at Richmond (Lauck).



Categories: Opinions, U.S. District Court - Eastern District of Virginia

Tags: ,

%d bloggers like this: