Stern v. Marshall
564 U.S. 462 (2011) Cited 3,738 times 71 Legal AnalysesHolding that a litigant forfeited a statutory right, noting the litigant "does not explain why" the relevant "statutory limitation may not be . . . waived"
Northern Pipeline Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co.
458 U.S. 50 (1982) Cited 2,967 times 20 Legal AnalysesHolding that the Bankruptcy Act of 1978 was unconstitutional in part because it allowed bankruptcy courts to adjudicate state common law claims
Granfinanciera, S. A. v. Nordberg
492 U.S. 33 (1989) Cited 1,918 times 31 Legal AnalysesHolding defendant to a preference action has a right to a jury trial pursuant to the Seventh Amendment of the United States Constitution, but that right can be waived by filing a claim in the bankruptcy proceedings
Langenkamp v. Culp
498 U.S. 42 (1990) Cited 783 times 4 Legal AnalysesHolding "there is no Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial" in the claims-allowance process
Katchen v. Landy
382 U.S. 323 (1966) Cited 1,167 times 2 Legal AnalysesHolding that a bankruptcy referee could exercise what was known as “summary jurisdiction” over a voidable-preference claim brought by a bankruptcy trustee against a creditor who had filed a proof of claim in the bankruptcy proceeding because the referee could not rule on the creditor's proof of claim without first resolving the voidable-preference issue
In re Orion Pictures Corp.
4 F.3d 1095 (2d Cir. 1993) Cited 735 times 11 Legal AnalysesHolding that contract issues, where one party has not violated a specific contractual clause, may not be decided as part of a motion to assume
In re Electric Machinery
479 F.3d 791 (11th Cir. 2007) Cited 88 times 1 Legal AnalysesHolding that a proceeding is core "if the proceeding is one that would arise only in bankruptcy"
In re Control Center, L.L.C.
288 B.R. 269 (M.D. Fla. 2002) Cited 56 times 1 Legal AnalysesHolding that a defamation claim is a personal injury tort claim
In re Stone
Case No. 8:10-cv-2517-JDW, Bankr. Case No. 8:10-bk-929-MGW, Adv. Pro. No. 8:10-ap-1073-MGW (M.D. Fla. Dec. 7, 2010) Cited 6 timesFinding that the case did not need to be immediately withdrawn from the bankruptcy court and that the bankruptcy court could handle all pretrial matters
Frank v. Lake Worth Utilities
CASE NO. 11-80734-CIV-MARRA (S.D. Fla. Jun. 30, 2011) Cited 1 timesCASE NO. 11-80734-CIV-MARRA. June 30, 2011 OPINION AND ORDER KENNETH MARRA, District Judge This cause is before the Court upon pro se Plaintiff Richard Gordon Frank's Motion for Withdrawal of Reference to District Court (DE 1). Defendant Lake Worth Utilities has filed a response to the motion. The Court has carefully considered the motion and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. Plaintiff has moved this Court to withdraw the reference of the adversary proceeding (Adv. Pro. No. 10-03727-BKC-PGH)
Section 157 - Procedures
28 U.S.C. § 157 Cited 51,399 times 78 Legal AnalysesDetermining the validity, extent, or priority of liens
Section 1334 - Bankruptcy cases and proceedings
28 U.S.C. § 1334 Cited 40,691 times 57 Legal AnalysesGranting "exclusive jurisdiction" to a federal court handling a bankruptcy case "of all the property, wherever located, of the debtor as of the commencement of such case, and of property of the estate"
Rule 38 - Right to a Jury Trial; Demand
Fed. R. Civ. P. 38 Cited 2,260 times 9 Legal AnalysesExplaining that a party waives its right to a jury trial by failing to properly request one
Section 342 - Notice
11 U.S.C. § 342 Cited 247 times 1 Legal AnalysesReferring to damages awarded under section 362(k) as “monetary penalty”