Bosworth v. Harp

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that remand to state court was not a “continuation” of the case and was properly taken despite the automatic stay because such action “expresses no opinion as to the merits of plaintiffs claim and does not affect the substantive rights of either party”
• examining remand under 28 U.S.C. § 1441 following the commencement of a bankruptcy case
• “[A] remand Lindley Contours, LLC v. AABB Fitness Holdings, Inc. pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441 does not constitute ‘commencement or continuation’ of an action.”
• “[B]ecause a remand is not an adjudication on the merits, it does not jeopardize or infringe on a debtor’s ‘breathing space’ or threaten to deplete the estate against the interests of other creditors.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).