Legal Opinion

Wolinsky v. Oak Tree Imaging, LP

District Court, S.D. Texas

Decided February 9, 2007No. Civil Action H-06-3144PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Memorandum and Order

MILLER, District Judge.

I. Introduction

This suit presents an issue of first impression at the fringe of supplemental and bankruptcy jurisdiction: Can a district court exercise jurisdiction over a withdrawn adversary proceeding’s state law claims that supplement the federal bankruptcy claim in another court? This precise question has not been addressed in plaintiffs motion to remand, Dkt. 5, or defendant’s response, Dkt. 7, but this court has an independent and continuing duty to examine whether a case comes within its subject-matter jurisdiction. Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp., 546…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Carnegie-Mellon University v. CohillSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  3. Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2006
  4. Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Services, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2005
  5. Finley v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1989

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. In Re Boehme, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2008
  2. Kaliner v. Antonoplos (In re DMW Marine, LLC)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2014
  3. Rex-Tech International, LLC v. James Rollings, EtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2011
  4. Marshall v. Maropco, Inc.District Court, N.D. Texas · 2017
  5. In Re PerryUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Texas · 2008

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API