Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States
Stefanou v. North River Insurance
486 U.S. 1007
- 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.