Does the doctrine against splitting a cause of action between a state and federal court apply?

This doctrine against splitting a cause of action is, in part, a rule of judicial economy that is imposed in particular cases as a matter of discretion. It can be waived. It often is not applicable where actions are pending simultaneously in state and federal courts. In deference to principles of federalism, the doctrine against splitting is infrequently applied where a cause of action based upon in personam jurisdiction is split between state and federal court, the general rule being that each court is "free to proceed in its own way and in its own time without reference to the proceedings in the other court." Kline v. Burke Constr. Co., 260 U.S. 226, 230, 43 S.Ct. 79, 81, 67 L.Ed. 226 (1922). Instead, the preference is to allow the first judgment on the merits to be pleaded as res

[104 BR 305]

judicata in the other. Nevertheless, it can be and is applied by federal courts in appropriate circumstances when a prior state action is pending. Graziano, 371 F.2d at 761-64.