Barbara Wortley v. Michael R. Bakst

How courts have described this case

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

• applying the “conceivable effect” test from Lemco Gypsum to conclude that the bankruptcy court had related-to jurisdiction over certain state-law tort claims
• core proceedings are those that involve a “right created by the federal bankruptcy law” or that “would arise only in bankruptcy” (quotation marks omitted)
• “Bankruptcy courts have authority to enter final orders and judgments in ‘core proceedings arising under [T]itle 11, or arising in a case under [T]itle 11.’” (quoting 28 U.S.C § 157(b)(1)
• “Core proceedings . . . are those that involve a right created by the federal bankruptcy law or that would arise only in bankruptcy, such as the filing of a proof of claim or an objection to the discharge of a particular debt.” (quotation marks omitted) (alteration adopted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).