Skip to main content
· 5/30/1996

In Re Schimmels

Citations

  • 85 F.3d 416
  • 36 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 143
  • 96 Daily Journal DAR 6212
  • 96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3808
  • 34 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1596
  • 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 13142

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that a self-contained order that granted summary judgment without discussing the facts or law satisfied Rule 58
  • noting that the separate-document rule “does not always require the filing of two separate documents”
  • holding that a summary judgment order satisfied Rule 58

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.