The court below had jurisdiction to vacate the stays and properly exercised it. The only question is as to that part of its order adjudicating that the creditor’s claim was not discharged.
Before Local Loan Co. v. Hunt,
We reach the same result if we. say that jurisdiction exists but that there is a policy, absent “special embarrassment,” of refusing to exercise it, i. e., of referring to the State Court the determination of the-effect of the discharge.
2
For the consequences of that kind of policy can no more-be waived by the parties than lack of jurisdiction. See Spector Motor Co. v. McLaughlin,
Except as to the vacation of the stay, the-order is reversed.
