Redmond v. Fifth Third Bank

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming bankruptcy court’s denial of a motion to reopen “where it appears that to do so would be futile and a waste of judicial resources”
• declining to reopen when there was a significant delay and the movant’s request for relief lacked facial validity
• affirming denial of motion to reopen in part because state court was appropriate forum to litigate alleged claims
• holding bankruptcy courts have “broad discretion” regarding motions to reopen
• affirming denial of motion to reopen where debtor delayed seven years in bringing the motion, he was not entitled to the relief he sought, and state court was the appropriate forum for his potential claims
• “The longer a party waits to file a motion to reopen a closed bankruptcy case, the more compelling the reason to reopen must be.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).