Steven A. Felsenthal
How Judge Felsenthal rules, drawn from 11 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Felsenthal no longer sits on this court. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.
About Judge Felsenthal
Steven A. Felsenthal served as a United States Bankruptcy Judge for the Northern District of Texas from 1987 to 2005, including three years as chief judge. He previously worked in judicial administration and for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
How Judge Felsenthal decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In the LJM2 bankruptcy, Felsenthal granted investors' motion to remand state-law claims against nondebtors because the amended complaint could have no conceivable effect on implementation of the confirmed plan.
“The amended complaint would have no conceivable effect on the implementation or execution of the LJM2 plan, and therefore the court lacks jurisdiction under § 1334.”
In the Aurora Natural Gas dispute, Felsenthal read the commercial-law priority provision to give significance to every word and resolved the competing gas-sale lien theories on that construction.
“In reading this provision, the court must give significance to every word.”
Procedural preferences
Uses nationwide federal contacts, rather than forum-state contacts, when bankruptcy jurisdiction and nationwide service of process govern personal jurisdiction.
“With federal subject matter jurisdiction, the determination of personal jurisdiction becomes a matter of federal contacts, not state contacts.”
Cautions
In Newhouse v. Texas Eastern Transmission Corp. (In re Aurora Natural Gas, LLC), Judge Felsenthal declined to grant summary judgment under the asserted securities-trade safe harbor because the payment’s timing and circumstances left material factual questions.
“The summary judgment record does not support a finding that the June 2001 transfer, made four months after the contractual due date, without identification of the January 2001 invoice for the December 2000 gas deliveries, made after two months of collection efforts, and applied only after negotiations, constitutes the type of payment commonly used in the securities trade.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“IT IS ORDERED that the motions to remand and/or abstain are DENIED, without prejudice.”
“IT IS ORDERED that the plaintiffs’ motion to remand is GRANTED.”
“IT IS ORDERED that the motion of Lucent Technologies, Inc., for summary judgment is GRANTED.”
“IT IS ORDERED that the motion of Duke Energy Trading and Marketing, L.L.C., to strike plaintiffs supplemental appendix is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for summary judgment filed by Edge Petroleum Operating Co., Inc., is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for summary judgment filed by Duke Energy Trading and Marketing, L.L.C., is GRANTED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for summary judgment filed by GPR Holdings, L.L.C., Golden Prairie Supply Services, L.L.C., and Aurora Natural Gas, L.L.C., is GRANTED.”
“IT IS ORDERED that Amerisure Insurance Company’s motion for summary judgment is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Hiram Johnson’s cross-motion for summary judgment is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”
“IT IS ORDERED that the motion to dismiss is DENIED.”
“IT IS ORDERED that the motion of William Dodson to dismiss is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the alternative motions of Andrew S. Fastow and Lea Fastow to abstain are DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion of Lea Fastow to dismiss is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motions of Michael Kopper and Andrew S. Fastow for a stay of this proceeding are GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion of Lea Fastow for a stay of this proceeding is DENIED.”
“The trustee’s motion to vacate the arbitration award is DENIED IN PART and GRANTED IN PART.”
“The objection to Canada’s claim is SUSTAINED IN PART, CARRIED IN PART and OVERRULED IN PART, consistent with the court’s ruling on the motion to vacate.”
“Canada’s motion for entry of a judgment is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”
“Kornman’s motion for a final judgment denying Canada’s claims against him based on the arbitration panel’s decision is GRANTED.”
“IT IS ORDERED that the motion for a turnover is DENIED without prejudice.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to dismiss the turnover motion or, in the alternative, to abstain is DENIED without prejudice.”
“IT IS ORDERED that the motion of Duke Energy Trading and Marketing, L.L.C., for summary judgment is GRANTED.”
“IT IS ORDERED that the motion to pay secured bank claims from funds held in the registry of the court is DENIED without prejudice.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
All five sampled matters were terminated, but the archive returned no docket entries for any sampled stream.
A historical record
Judge Felsenthal no longer sits on this court. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled here. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.