Sun Buick, Inc. v. Saab Cars Usa, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the Pennsylvania Board of Vehicle Manufacturers, Dealers and Salespersons was not a state court for purposes of the federal removal statute
• Observing that, “[o]n its face, the removal statute limits removal to cases pending before a state ‘court.’ This should be dispositive, as the Pennsylvania Board of Vehicles is, by definition, not a ‘court.’”
• noting as relevant to the inquiry that agency lacked the power to award damages and its \powers of action to afford relief [were] circumscribed\
• criticizing functional test, but stopping short of rejecting it because administrative agency at issue “would not qualify [as a state court] under any circumstances”
• criticizing the functional test but ultimately holding that “[u]nder any test” the agency in question “would not qualify as a court”
• finding “no case from the Supreme Court . . . holding that a case can be removed from an administrative agency to federal court on the grounds that the administrative agency is functionally a court”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).