Federal Case

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that while “the District Court in the instant litigation had jurisdiction to determine the scope of the stay, its issuance of the injunction challenged on this appeal was a misuse of its equitable power”
• noting that “[w]e are not as certain as the District Court that, if we reached the issue, we would follow Frenville”
• stating that bankruptcy courts’ general equitable powers under section 105 of the Bankruptcy Code are “broader than the automatic stay provisions of section 362”
• court may use its equitable powers to assure the orderly conduct of the reorganization proceedings
• because of the district court’s substantial familiarity and experience. with the case, the issue of the applicability of the automatic stay was best left for that court to decide
• “The initial issue is whether the District Court has jurisdiction to determine the applicability of the automatic stay. We conclude that it does.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).