Opportunity Sales Co. v. Edwards

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 necessary application of a federal statutory law “implicat[ing] the regulation of organizations or activities affecting interstate commerce” had not been shown
• noting that in certain circumstances “the bankruptcy court’s proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law will narrow the issues to be resolved by this Court”
• finding that “plaintiffs’ assertion that withdrawal would prevent forum shopping is baseless because defendants only seek to keep the actions in the forum that plaintiffs filed them in”
• discussing benefit of bank ruptcy court administration where claims likely involved “novel issues of bankruptcy law”
• denying motion to withdraw reference of core proceedings where bankruptcy court had administered estate for over two years and was familiar with the extensive record
• finding “the bankruptcy court ‘has jurisdiction to determine its own jurisdiction’ ” (quoting Hassett v. FDIC (In re CIS Corp.), 140 B.R. 351, 353 (S.D.N.Y. 1992))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).