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.