Lee N. Koehler v. The Bank of Bermuda Limited

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the district court erred in granting certification, where the litigation would not be expedited by an immediate appeal: “either way we rule, a remand will be required.”
• observing that while interlocutory orders may involve issues of in personam jurisdiction, \ § 1292(b) was not meant to substitute an appellate court's judgment for that of the trial court\
• recognizing “the special ability a trial court possesses to assess the efficiency of an immediate appeal”
• explaining that certification under § 1292(b) should be “rare” and reserved for “exceptional circumstances”
• noting that “[i]t is a basic tenet of federal law to delay appellate review until a final judgment has been entered” and that 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) “is a rare exception to the final judgment rule that generally prohibits piecemeal appeals”
• noting that “[i]t is a basic tenet of federal law to delay appellate review until a final judgment has been entered” and that 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) “is a rare exception to the final judgment rule that generally prohibits piecemeal appeals”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).