Fernandez v. Valenzuela

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming that in the circumstances presented “all claims against Justice Pagones for injunctive relief are barred by 42 U.S.C. § 1983”
• “although we find that there was a violation of the automatic stay, we find neither willfulness nor malice in that action, and affirm [the] Judgefs] order [dismissing the adversary proceeding]”
• “although we find that there was a violation of the automatic stay, we find neither willfulness nor malice in that action, and affirm [the] Judgef’s] order [dismissing the adversary proceeding]”
• “although we find that there was a violation of the automatic stay, we find neither willfulness nor malice in that action, and affirm [the] Judge[’s] order [dismissing the adversary proceeding]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).