Hatzel & Buehler, Inc. v. Orange & Rockland Utilities, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• mandating withdrawal where resolution of the case would “require substantial and material consideration of the regulations applicable to OSHA”
• refusing to interpret Section 157 to require bankruptcy issues for mandatory withdrawal because doing so would “effectively defeat the attempts of the Code to rationalize bankruptcy litigation”
• finding proceeding to be non-core “because the state contract and tort claims do not involve any interpretation of the Bankruptcy Code and are not otherwise related to the underlying bankruptcy proceeding”
• finding proceeding to be non-core “because the state contract and tort claims do not involve any interpretation of the Bankruptcy Code and are not otherwise related to the underlying bankruptcy proceeding”
• mandatory withdrawal is not necessary “simply whenever non-bankruptcy issues [a]re considered”
• Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).