John Ellis Martineau

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas district Retired 1937 · served 1928–1937 Appointed by Calvin Coolidge 24 signed orders read

Judge Martineau no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.

How Judge Martineau decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

He protected bankruptcy estates from insider transactions that diverted corporate assets to retire an insider’s own stock.

“Lytle received these funds in violation of a trust, and cannot in that way obtain a preference.”

He construed Arkansas insurance exemptions broadly enough to protect cash-surrender value as well as proceeds payable at death.

“It would be a narrow construction of the Arkansas statute to say that the exemption applied only to the fund realized by the death of the insured and not to the cash surrender value of the policy of insurance where creditors seek to have its value applied to the payment of their debts, prior to the death of the husband.”

He upheld highway license fees where the charge applied uniformly and fairly to the privilege granted.

“All that is required is that the statute levy a license fee that is uniform, fair, and equitable.”

Procedural preferences

He allowed carefully justified extensions in bankruptcy when unexpected conduct prevented creditors from acting by the original deadline.

“The surprise thus brought about by the unusual and unexpected conduct of the bankrupt was a sufficient reason for extending the time for the entry of appearance.”

He expected parties seeking late amendments to show diligence in discovering the underlying facts.

“By the exercise' of proper diligence the faets in connection with the making of the false statements could have been known to appellant before the end of the 10 days allowed by General Order in Bankruptcy 32 for filing specifications.”

He treated a federal remand as mandatory when the present amount in controversy fell below the jurisdictional threshold, regardless of possible collateral effects.

“The judgment should be reversed, and the ease remanded, with instructions to the trial court to in turn remand it to the circuit court of Clay county, Mo.”

Cautions

He would not enforce private arrangements that accomplished indirectly what federal law expressly prohibited.

“The law cannot be defeated in this indirect way.”

He rejected equity pleading used only to obtain money damages where an adequate legal remedy existed.

“No cited case supports the theory of the bill, nor do the well-recognized principles of equity entitle plaintiffs to the relief for which they pray.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Stanley's Inc. Store No. 3 v. Earl
· 1928-10-11
Appeal (creditor-appellant) Denied

“The order is therefore affirmed.”

Behimer v. United States
· 1928-10-16
Appeal (defendant-appellant) Denied

“The judgment of the court below is affirmed.”

Rerat v. Fisk Tire, Inc.
· 1928-10-16
Petition to revise (bankrupt) Denied

“The petition to revise is therefore denied.”

Lawrence v. United States
· 1928-10-16
Appeal (defendant-appellant) Denied

“The judgment of the court below is therefore affirmed.”

Minnesota Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Marshall
· 1928-12-28
Appeal (insurer-appellant) Denied

“The cause is therefore affirmed.”

International Indemnity Co. v. Steil
· 1929-01-24
Appeal (insurer-appellant) Denied

“Therefore the case will be affirmed.”

First National Bank of Lincoln v. Live Stock National Bank
· 1929-03-05
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The case is affirmed.”

Marsh v. United States
· 1929-06-18
War risk insurance claim (plaintiff) Granted

“leads me to the conclusion that he was totally and permanently disabled at the time of his discharge from the army.”

Lytle v. Andrews
· 1929-07-10
Appeal (defendant-appellant) Denied

“The decree of the court below is affirmed.”

Setoff claim (defendant-appellant) Denied

“Lytle received these funds in violation of a trust, and cannot in that way obtain a preference.”

Model Dairy, Inc. v. Commissioner
· 1929-12-10
Petition for review (taxpayer) Denied

“The decision appealed from is sustained.”

Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co. v. United States
· 1929-12-13
Appeal (railroad-appellant) Denied

“The judgment of the court below will be-affirmed.”

Decosimo v. United States
· 1930-01-10
Appeal (defendant-appellant) Denied

“The judgment of the court below is affirmed.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

No case-level docket records are available for this pre-electronic tenure, so the profile makes no claim about caseload mix or case duration.

A historical record

Judge Martineau no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.