Chick Kam Choo v. Exxon Corp.

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Chick Kam Choo v. Exxon Corp." – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (December 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Chick Kam Choo v. Exxon Corp.
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued March 30, 1988 Decided May 16, 1988
Full case name	Chick Kam Choo v. Exxon Corp.
Citations	486 U.S. 140 (more) 108 S. Ct. 1684; 100 L. Ed. 2d 127
Holding
Because the District Court's injunction barring the state court proceedings is broader than is necessary "to protect or effectuate" that court's 1980 judgment dismissing petitioner's lawsuit from federal court, this case must be remanded for the entry of a more narrowly tailored order.
Court membership
Chief Justice William Rehnquist Associate Justices William J. Brennan Jr. · Byron White Thurgood Marshall · Harry Blackmun John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy
Case opinions
Majority	O'Connor, joined by unanimous
Concurrence	White
Laws applied
28 U.S.C. § 2283

Chick Kam Choo v. Exxon Corp., 486 U.S. 140 (1988), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a federal court's dismissal of a civil action on the ground that it should be heard in a foreign court, under the doctrine of forum non conveniens, does not preclude the plaintiff from filing the same action in a state court that applies different forum non conveniens rules.