Browning v. Navarro’s Empirical Analysis
743 F.2d 1069 · 1984
Citation profile
61 federal appellate · 7 district · 14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 208 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably Little Creek Development Co. v. Commonwealth Mortgage Corp. (1986), Sws Erectors Inc v. Infax Inc (1996)
61 federal appellate · 7 district · 14 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 105 · 11 U.S.C. § 362 · 28 U.S.C. § 1443 · 28 U.S.C. § 1447 · 28 U.S.C. § 1452
Relies on Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co. · Thermtron Products, Inc. v. Hermansdorfer · United States v. ITT Continental Baking Co. · United States v. Armour & Co. · Pacor Inc. v. Higgins
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 208 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"any claim or cause of action in a civil action other than a proceeding before the United States Tax Court or a civil action by a governmental unit to enforce such governmental unit’s police or regulatory power, to the district court for the district where such civil action is pending,- if such district court has jurisdiction of such claim or cause of action under section 1334 of this title.””
13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Equitable grounds include: (1) forum non conveniens; (2) a holding that, if the civil action has been bifurcated by removal, the entire action should be tried in the same court; (3) a holding that a state court is better able to respond to questions involving state law; (4) expertise of the particular court; (5) duplicative and uneconomic effort of judicial resources in two forums; (6) prejudice to the involuntarily removed parties; (7) comity considerations; and (8) a lessened possibility of an inconsistent result. See Browning v. Navarro, 743 F.2d 1069 , 1076 n. 21 (5th Cir.1984).”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he federal court is completely divested of jurisdiction once it mails a certified copy of the order to the clerk of the state court.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.