Capital Hill Group v. Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
Jul
02
2008
Ruling
Legal malpractice claim related to zoning matter was a proceeding "arising in" debtor's bankruptcy.
Procedural posture
Plaintiff, the client of defendant law firm in a bankruptcy proceeding and a zoning matter, moved for remand of its malpractice case concerning the rezoning against the law firm pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 1447(c) and § 1452(b), or in the alternative, for abstention by the federal district court pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 1334(c). The law firm had removed the case to federal court citing jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1334(b).
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Capital Hill Group v. Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Court
: