About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations [1] (July 2019 - August 2020)

handle is hein.ali/resndjmts0041 and id is 1 raw text is: JUDGMENTS 2D CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION Scope N.D.Ill.Bkrtcy.Ct.2020. Scope quot. in sup. (cit. as Introduction). Chapter 11 debtor corporation brought an adversary proceeding against ex-wife of its sole shareholder, seeking to avoid as fraudulent its pre-petition transfer to ex-wife of certain real property, which shareholder had purchased and assigned to debtor. This court granted ex-wife's motion to dismiss, holding that the transfer was made pursuant to a judgment in the marriage-dissolution proceedings between shareholder and ex-wife, in which the state court determined that the property was part of the marital estate, and that debtor's complaint in this action was a collateral attack on the state-court judgment that was barred under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. The court noted that, while debtor was not a party to the state-court proceedings, it was in privity with shareholder for purposes of those proceedings under the Restatement Second of Judgments, and thus the judgment was binding on it. In re 3991 Transport Company Inc., 610 B.R. 881, 884-885. Relation Between Law of Res Judicata and Law of Procedure C.A.9, 2019. Quot. in case quot. in sup. After the county civil service commission affirmed the termination of his employment, former county employee brought a lawsuit against county and supervisors, alleging that defendants violated state and federal laws by terminating him for engaging in whistleblowing activities. The district court granted defendants' motion to dismiss. This court affirmed in part, holding that the district court did not err in finding that the county commission's decision had a preclusive effect against plaintiff's federal-law claims. The court quoted Restatement Second of Judgments in explaining that plaintiff had a sufficient opportunity to litigate his federal claims before the county commission, because he submitted a dispute over legal rights before a legally-empowered tribunal and had the opportunity to present witnesses and evidence. Bahra v. County of San Bernardino, 945 F.3d 1231, 1236. CHAPTER 2. VALIDITY OF JUDGMENTS TOPIC 3. SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION § 11. Subject Matter Jurisdiction Alaska, 2020. Cit. in case cit. in ftn. to diss. op. After unmarried Native American father obtained sole legal and physical custody of child pursuant to a trial-court order, mother filed a motion before the tribal court to modify the custody order. The tribal court granted mother's motion to modify and claimed jurisdiction over the case and the parties. The trial court denied mother's motion, finding that the judgment of the tribal court was not enforceable. This court vacated and remanded, holding that the trial COPYRIGHT ©2020 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most