Karl Linard Malloy v. Kristin E. Schelin, et al.

The bankruptcy court entered a single order that both (1) remanded petitioner’s removed state­ court action on abstention grounds and (2) granted automatic-stay relief by modifying the automatic stay to permit the state-court litigation to proceed to final judgment. The district court’s memorandum order— the order actually appealed—affirmed remand but did not address the bankruptcy court’s grant of automatic-stay relief. The court of appeals then held that 28 U.S.C. § 1334(d) barred appellate review of the abstention ruling, while separately affirming the grant of automatic-stay relief in a brief paragraph stating only that it discerned no abuse of discretion. The questions presented are:

1. Whether 28 U.S.C. § 1334(d) bars appellate review of constitutional and statutory challenges to the procedures and authority underlying a bankruptcy court’s abstention and remand order.

2. Whether a bankruptcy court may grant relief from the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d) without making the findings required by that statute, and whether such rulings may be affirmed without addressing the absence of those findings.