Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States

Stefanou v. North River Insurance

Stefanou v. N. River Ins., 486 U.S. 1007 (1988)

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1988-05-16
Topic
general

How later courts describe this case

  • noting that if an order of remand is "not a mandatory remand under Sec. 1447(c), it enjoys no immunity from review"
  • noting that if an order of remand is “not a mandatory remand under § 1447(e), it enjoys no immunity from review”
  • federal law provides the substantive standard for reviewing the grant or denial of a new trial in a diversity case
  • purchaser of mobile home pursuant to an unwritten agreement found to have an insurable interest, in the mobile home
  • once basis for removal jurisdiction is dropped from the proceedings, federal court has discretion to remand the action to the state court from which it came
  • reasonable minds could not differ that there was no bad faith
  • “[t]he decision of a trial court to grant or deny a motion for a new trial will only be overturned on appeal upon a showing of a ‘clear abuse of discretion,’ ” quoting Trujillo v. Goodman, 825 F.2d 1453, 1461 (10th Cir.1987)
  • RLA does not have complete preemptive power

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Stefanou v. North River Insurance. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
82 opinions

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.