IN MATTER OF BRANIFF AIRWAYS, INC

Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Report a problem

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

No. 83-1048.

Attorney(S)

Ronald S. Orr, David H. Kennedy, Los Angeles, Cal., Stephen L. Taylor, Dallas Fort Worth Airport, Tex., for intervenor-appellant. Kent Kibbie, Fort Worth, Tex., for Bank of New York, etc. David Bonderman, Washington, D.C., Daniel C. Stewart, Dallas, Tex., for Braniff. Robert J. White, Los Angeles, Cal., for Pacific Southwest Airlines. John R. Blinn, Stephen A. Goodwin, Fort Worth, Tex., for amicus curiae Secured Bank Lenders to Braniff Airways. Eloise E. Davies, Civ. Div., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for amicus curiae U.S.

Judges

Thomas Gibbs Gee
Reynaldo Guerra Garza
Henry Anthony Politz

Are you a practicing lawyer?

Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.

Upload pleading to use the new AI search

Click here to upload

Cites

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

No. 83-1048.

Attorney(S)

Ronald S. Orr, David H. Kennedy, Los Angeles, Cal., Stephen L. Taylor, Dallas Fort Worth Airport, Tex., for intervenor-appellant. Kent Kibbie, Fort Worth, Tex., for Bank of New York, etc. David Bonderman, Washington, D.C., Daniel C. Stewart, Dallas, Tex., for Braniff. Robert J. White, Los Angeles, Cal., for Pacific Southwest Airlines. John R. Blinn, Stephen A. Goodwin, Fort Worth, Tex., for amicus curiae Secured Bank Lenders to Braniff Airways. Eloise E. Davies, Civ. Div., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for amicus curiae U.S.

Judges

Thomas Gibbs Gee
Reynaldo Guerra Garza
Henry Anthony Politz

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Please sign up to generate summary.

IN THE MATTER OF BRANIFF AIRWAYS, INC., ET AL., DEBTOR. BRANIFF AIRWAYS, INC., ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES, v. CIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD, DEFENDANT, AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC., INTERVENOR-APPELLANT.

PER CURIAM:

We affirm the judgment of the District Court, essentially for the reasons stated in its memorandum opinion. We add, in particular, that we conclude that 28 United States Code §§ 1471(a) and (b) were not invalidated by the Marathon decision, but if they were, nevertheless, the jurisdictional grant of 28 United States Code § 1334 remains effective during the transitional period.

The Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipeline Co., ___ U.S. ___, 102 S.Ct. 2858, 73 L.Ed.2d 598 (1982).

AFFIRMED.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

IN THE MATTER OF BRANIFF AIRWAYS, INC., ET AL., DEBTOR. BRANIFF AIRWAYS, INC., ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES, v. CIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD, DEFENDANT, AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC., INTERVENOR-APPELLANT.

Comments