orders are void.”). 35 . In re Walker, 51 F.3d 562, 568 (5th Cir.1995). 36 . 28 U.S.C. § 1334(a). 37 . 28 U.S.C. § 1334(e)(1); see also Kane Enters. v. MacGregor (USA) Inc., 322 F.3d 371, 374 (5th Cir.2003) ("The district in which a chapter 11 petition is filed has exclusive jurisdiction over the property of the estate.”). 38 . See 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b). 39 . 28 U.S.C. § 157(a). 40 . Bankruptcy judges "may hear and determine all cases under title 11 and all core proceedings arising under title 11, or arising in a case under title 11” and "enter appropriate orders and judgment.” 28 U.S.C. § 157(b); In re Wood, 825 F.2d 90, 95 (5th Cir.1987). In contrast to core proceedings, bankruptcy judges have the limited power to “hear a proceeding that is not a core 92 F.2d 502, 1182 (3d Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>). 55 . Celotex, 514 U.S. at 327, 115 S.Ct.
holding that a consent order purporting to exert jurisdiction over nonestate property cannot be utilized to support a finding of subject matter jurisdiction over claims that otherwise could not be heard in bankruptcy court holding that state law claims cannot pend from a federal one over which the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction holding over holding that the superior court had no jurisdiction over the division of marital property when the district court had properly invoked jurisdiction over the property holding that the information must establish that the court has jurisdiction over both the subject matter and the parties