## Facts

- A Michigan resident, as administratrix of a decedent’s estate, filed a wrongful-death action in Illinois against an interstate railroad under the Michigan Wrongful Death Act.
- The railroad was amenable to suit in Illinois and operated in Illinois and Michigan.
- After the Illinois action was filed, the railroad brought a separate proceeding in Michigan and obtained an ex parte temporary injunction restraining the administratrix from prosecuting the Illinois case.
- In the Illinois action, the administratrix filed a supplemental complaint seeking a temporary injunction to stop the railroad from enforcing the Michigan injunction.
- She alleged the railroad had not used ordinary Illinois procedural methods to challenge the Illinois forum and that the Michigan action was brought to block the Illinois case and pressure settlement, causing irreparable harm.
- The Illinois trial court denied the requested temporary injunction and dismissed the supplemental complaint without an answer or counteraffidavits from the railroad.
- The Illinois Appellate Court affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether an Illinois court that first acquired jurisdiction over a transitory wrongful-death action must recognize and yield to a later foreign injunction restraining prosecution of the Illinois case.
2. Whether an Illinois court may enjoin a defendant from enforcing a foreign anti-suit injunction to protect Illinois jurisdiction over the pending case.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Illinois reversed and remanded.
- Illinois was not required, by full faith and credit or comity, to defer to the Michigan injunction obtained after Illinois had acquired jurisdiction.
- The Illinois court had equitable authority to restrain the railroad from enforcing the Michigan injunction when necessary to protect Illinois jurisdiction and the plaintiff’s ability to proceed in Illinois.

## Legal Principles

- A transitory cause of action may be litigated wherever the defendant is subject to process, even when the claim arises under another state’s substantive law.
- Full faith and credit does not require a state to give effect to a foreign injunction whose purpose is to halt litigation already properly pending in the forum state, rather than to adjudicate the merits.
- A court of equity with jurisdiction over the parties may, in limited circumstances, enjoin parties from prosecuting or enforcing foreign proceedings that are instituted to defeat or embarrass the forum court’s prior-acquired jurisdiction.
- Illinois public policy favors open access to its courts for residents and nonresidents to litigate transitory claims against defendants found within the state.

## Conclusion

Because Illinois first acquired jurisdiction over a transitory wrongful-death action and the later Michigan injunction functioned to obstruct that jurisdiction, Illinois neither had to honor the foreign order nor leave the plaintiff without protection; the Illinois court could enjoin the railroad from enforcing the Michigan injunction and proceed with the case on remand.


James v. Grand Trunk W. R.R. Co., 14 Ill. 2d 356 (1958)