Legal Opinion
Doughty v. Underwriters at Lloyd's, London
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Decided October 18, 1993No. 93-1174, 93-1214PublishedCited by 45 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SELYA, Circuit Judge.
In this proceeding, we conclude that the district court’s abstention-based remand order is not immediately appealable and that mandamus is not an appropriate alternative. Because this jurisdictional determination involves an issue on which the circuits are somewhat less than uniform, we take some pains to elucidate our rationale. We do not, however, reach the merits and, 'accordingly, leave a veritable hothouse of efflorescent questions to be plucked at another time and in another forum.
I. BACKGROUND
The controversy that is before us finds its genesis in a beguilingly…
2Cases cited55 opinions
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Carnegie-Mellon University v. CohillSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Coopers & Lybrand v. LivesaySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by45 opinions
- Quackenbush v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- United States v. Richard A. HornCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1994
- Snapper, Inc. v. RedanCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1999
- Harold S. Alston v. Walter Redman, Warden Charles M. Oberly, Iii, Attorney General of the State of Delaware and the State of DelawareCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
- United States v. Mary Rose Oakar and Joseph DemioCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1997
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.