Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 21 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Seven Springs, Inc. v. Abramson (In Re Seven Springs, Inc.).
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Seven Springs, Inc. v. Abramson (In Re Seven Springs, Inc.) Anchor | green | “six-part test for determining whether mandatory abstention applies.” | 3 |
| 2 | Billy Prince v. Sears Holdings Corporation | green | “if a plaintiff files suit in state court and the defendant seeks to adjudicate the matter in federal court through removal, it is the defendant who carries the burden of alleging in his notice of removal and, if challenged, demonstrating the court's jurisdiction over the matter.” | 3 |
| 3 | Security Farms v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffers, Warehousemen & Helpers | green | “abstention can exist only where there is a parallel proceeding in state court. that is, inherent in the concept of abstention is the presence of a pendent state action in favor of which the federal court must, or may, abstain.” | 3 |
| 4 | Virginia ex rel. Integra Rec LLC v. Countrywide Securities Corp. | green | “a federal court does not undertake a comparison of the relative federal and state dockets.” | 3 |
| 5 | Virginia ex rel. Integra Rec LLC v. Countrywide Securities Corp. | green | “the correct inquiry is not where litigation would move the fastest, but whether it can be timely adjudicated in state court at all.” | 3 |
| 6 | Steyr-Daimler-Puch of America Corp. v. Pappas | green | “we conclude that an alter ego claim, under virginia law, is property of the corporation so that it becomes property of the bankruptcy estate over which the trustee has control pursuant to 11 u.s.c. 541” | 3 |
| 7 | Bestwall LLC v. Official Committee of Asbestos | green | “section 1334(b) jurisdiction over sutherland's suit for specific performance against stallone exists because the amount of damages, if any, due sutherland from the estate for breach of contract will be effected by whether sutherland obtains the property from stallone.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.