James Sahagun v. Landmark Fence Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• applying, in the bankruptcy context, the settled rule that courts may raise jurisdictional issues sua sponte
• rejecting the contention that “the issues in the appeal [are] purely matters of law” based on “the language of the order on appeal,” which included “explicit directions for the bankruptcy court to engage in ‘further fact-finding’ ”
• finding a “significant” risk of piecemeal litigation where “[f]ar from remanding for a mechanical or computational task, the district court directed the bankruptcy court to engage in further fact-finding before reassessing its damages award”
• “Although the parties characterize the issues in the appeal as purely matters of law, viewing the appeal through this lens ignores the language of the order on appeal.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).