Greenblatt v. Richard Potasky Jeweler, Inc. (In Re Richard Potasky Jeweler, Inc.)

How courts have described this case

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

• “[Section] 105, standing alone, cannot serve as a source of authority for granting a permanent injunction [barring creditors from pursuing claims against a non-debtor].”
• “Because [the creditor] availed himself of the equitable jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court, he cannot complain of his consequent loss of the right to jury trial.”
• “Therefore, where a permanent injunction, regardless of the identity of its direct beneficiary, serves to protect the property or facilitate the administration of the debtor’s estate, § 524(e) will not stand in the way of the court issuing the injunction.”
• “Therefore, where a permanent injunction, regardless of the identity of its direct beneficiary, serves to protect the property or facilitate the administration of the debtor’s estate, § 524(e) will not stand in the way of the court issuing the injunction.”
• “[T]he Supreme Court [in Barton v. Barbour ] held that a suit could not be maintained against a receiver for an act in his official capacity without first obtaining leave from the court which had appointed him.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).