of City of Waco— even if it also happens to have an incidental effect on the court’s jurisdiction. 4 F.3d at 228 (3d Cir.1993). Inasmuch as the order of dismissal in the present case arose out of Carr’s release of Red Cross from tortfeasor liability, the underlying dismissal order clearly had independent relevance in adjudging the rights of all three parties involved in this action. That is, the ramifications of the dismissal order impacted on more than the issue of federal subject matter jurisdiction alone. Consequently, we conclude that the district court’s order dismissing Red Cross is separable from the subsequent order of remand. Therefore, appellate review of the dismissal order is not barred by 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d). Accord Aliota v. Graham, 984 F.2d at 1353 (3d Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). B. We also conclude that the district court’s
holding that the mixed question of exigent circumstance is reviewable de novo as a question of law holding that generally the question of waiver and estoppel is a question of fact holding question of resubstitution separate from question of remand and thus reviewable on appeal holding that remand order based on forum selection clause is reviewable on appeal holding it is a question of fact