Shi Yong Fang v. Holder

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Stern v. Marshall, 564 U.S. 462 , 131 S.Ct. 2594 , 180 L.Ed.2d 475 (2011), does not prevent a bankruptcy judge from entering final orders in statutorily core proceedings
• finding that the court had statutory authority to consider a plan that included third-party releases as a core proceeding
• “Voya waived or forfeited any argument that it was entitled to have an Article III court enter a final order . . .”
• “To the extent that Voya intended to keep its constitutional objection in its back pocket to be used on appeal if it was not successful before me, such gamesmanship is prohibited, establishes intent and implied consent and therefore constitutes waiver.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).