United States v. Tejbir S. Oberoi

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 collateral order doctrine applied “[b]ecause the district court’s order conclusively determined the issue of the [attorney’s] continued representation of [the defendant,]” and could not “be effectively reviewed on final appeal”
• “Because the [trial] court’s order [denying the motion to withdraw] conclusively determined the 15 issue of [counsel’s] continued representation of [defendant] and cannot be effectively reviewed on final appeal, we have jurisdiction over this interlocutory appeal.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).