TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Lincoln Lynch v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., Gaf Corporation

Lincoln LYNCH, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JOHNS-MANVILLE SALES CORP., Et Al., Defendants, GAF Corporation, Defendant-Appellant

Lincoln Lynch v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., 701 F.2d 43 (6th Cir. 1983)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
February 22, 1983
Docket
No. 82-3781
Judges
Lively, Martin, Kru-Pansky
Citations
701 F.2d 431983 U.S. App. LEXIS 30296

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

This matter is before the court upon consideration of appellee’s motion to dismiss and appellant’s response. The case arises out of asbestos litigation.

On October 28, 1982, appellant’s motion for a stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362 (a)(1) was denied by the district court. Previously, an automatic stay had been granted to two of appellant’s co-defendants, Johns-Manville and Unarco, because they had filed Chapter 11 reorganization petitions in two bankruptcy courts. Appellant appealed from the October 28 order that denied it, as a solvent co-defendant, protection under the automatic stay provision of 11 U.S.C. § 362 (a)(1).

Appellant contends the order of the district court denying its motion for a stay is appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 as a “collateral order,” defined in Cohen v. Beneficial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-47 , 69 S.Ct. 1221, 1225-26 , 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). Upon consideration this court concludes that the order in the present case is not within the “small class” described in Cohen which may be appealed pursuant to § 1291 even though the usual requirement of finality is not met. We also conclude that the order is not appealable pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (a)(1) as one refusing an injunction.

See Jackson Brewing Co. v. Clarke, 303 F.2d 844 (5th Cir.1962);

Jensen-ius v. Texaco, Inc., 639 F.2d 1342 (5th Cir. 1981);

Mellon Bank, N.A. v. Pritchard-Keang Nam Corp., 651 F.2d 1244 (8th Cir. 1981).

Since this court lacks jurisdiction over the appeal, the motion to dismiss must be granted.

The appeal is dismissed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1984: 21985: 11990: 119842026peak 1984 · 2

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 4

DepthCaseCited by
Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949) 8,958
Jackson Brewing Co. v. Clarke, 303 F.2d 844 (5th Cir. 1962) 53
Mellon Bank v. Pritchard-Keang Nam Corp., 651 F.2d 1244 (8th Cir. 1981) 24
D. K. Jensenius v. Texaco, Inc., 639 F.2d 1342 (5th Cir. 1981) 11

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list