IN RE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF BOSTON, A NATIONAL BANKING ASSOCIATION, PETITIONER

Citator

Cited By

• Corporate Mgmt. Advisors, Inc. v. Artjen Complexus, Inc., 561 F.3d 1294 (11th Cir. 2009)
  …nion. REVERSED AND REMANDED. . Although we have previously addressed this question in In re First National Bank of Boston, as that case was vacated on other grounds, we have no binding precedent to guide us. 70 F. 3d 1184 (11th Cir.1995), vacated, 102 F. 3d 1577 (11th Cir.1996) (per curiam). Today, we reassert much of the reasoning from In re First National. . See Bonner v. City of Prichard, Ala., 661 F. 2d 1206, 1207 (11th Cir.1981) (en banc) (adopting the prior precedent of the former Fifth Circuit as b…
• Whole Health Chiropractic & Wellness, Inc. v. Humana Med. Plan, Inc., 254 F.3d 1317 (11th Cir. 2001)
  …ty days of removal, was not authorized under § 1447(c) and was therefore reviewable. See id. at 1189-90. That decision lacks precedential value, as it was vacated due to the settlement of the underlying case. See In re First Nat’l Bank of Boston, 102 F. 3d 1577, 1577 (11th Cir.1996) (per curiam). Since that time, we have not determined whether sua sponte remand orders entered within thirty days following removal are authorized under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c).…
• In re The Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Co., 104 F.3d 322 (11th Cir. 1997)
  …PER CURIAM: This case is back before us on a second petition for writ of mandamus. The petition is predicated upon In re: First National Bank of Boston, 70 F. 3d 1184 (11th Cir.1995), vacated, 102 F. 3d 1577 (11th Cir.1996). Because that decision has been vacated, and in light of the subsequent decision in Things Remembered, Inc. v. Petrarca, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 494, 133 L.Ed.2d 461 (1995), we hold that we lack jurisdiction to consider the merits of th…

  ← 1 / 2 →

Authorities Cited

• In re First Nat'l Bank OF Boston, 70 F.3d 1184 (11th Cir. 1995)