Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Glinka

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that although Blinder’s case-by-case analysis may fit “in some limited circumstances, the facts surrounding the subpoena and motions in the case at bar do not merit bypassing the requirement of a contempt adjudication before permitting an appeal” (emphasis added)
• “it is only when a dispute ‘has been narrowed and there is no indication that further action by the bankruptcy court will be forthcoming’ that an order concerning a Rule 2004 examination is considered final.”
• “To obtain appellate review of an order compelling production or testimony in the rare case when an appeal after final judgment would not cure an erroneous ruling, a witness must refuse to obey the subpoena and suffer an order imposing a contempt penalty.”
• bankruptcy court order defining scope of subpoena

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).