Abatement, Multiple Lawsuits

Because of procedural rules and/or general litigation strategy, more than one lawsuit is sometimes filed in a different court. In certain circumstances, “abatement” limits subsequent or separate lawsuits.
Under abatement (a/k/a “pending action doctrine”), when a claim involves the same subject matter and parties as a previously filed suit so that the facts and issues presented are the same, resolution should occur through the first suit and the second suit should be dismissed. Estate of Holtmeyer v. Piontek, 913 S.W.2d 352, 357 (Mo. Ct. App. 1996). Put differently, the court in which the claim is first filed acquires exclusive jurisdiction over the matter. It is properly applied where the second suit/cause of action is identical to the first suit filed.
Unlike on typical motions to dismiss in Missouri, the court may look beyond a plaintiff’s lawsuit in determining whether abatement should apply and may view a movant’s motion and supporting evidence. Id.
Contact with questions.

Related Articles

Premises Liability: Third-Party Criminal Acts

November 22, 2023

As a general rule, if a customer/invitee of a business is harmed by a third-party criminal act, the business is not responsible. The rationale for this rule is that criminal acts are rarely foreseeable. Early v. Dunn, 670 S.W.3d 47, 51 (Mo. App. E.D. 2023). There are a number of exceptions. First, a duty arises…

Read More

Mootness, Exceptions

October 19, 2023

Courts generally shy away from rendering decisions in moot cases. A case is moot when “the question presented for decision seeks a judgment upon some matter which, if the judgment was rendered, would not have any practical effect upon any then existing controversy.” DCM v. Pemiscot County Juvenile Office, 578 S.W.3d 776, 780 (Mo. 2019). There…

Read More

Comity, Multiple Lawsuits, Litigation

October 11, 2023

In complex situations, it is not uncommon for multiple lawsuits to be pending in multiple jurisdictions. When this occurs, one court, in the interests of comity, may allow the other court to handle the entire dispute. At the state level in Missouri, comity is not an ironclad rule, but a rule of “practice, convenience, and…

Read More

Contracts: General versus Specific Provisions

October 2, 2023

Parties are bound to the terms of the contract they sign, unless induced by fraud, duress, or undue influence. Lehman v. Automotive Investments, LLC, 608 S.W.3d 733, 738 (Mo. App. E.D. 2020). In analyzing contracts, courts focus on the plain and ordinary meaning of the language used. Id. Often times, however, a conflict can arise between what…

Read More
Scroll to Top