James Augustine Walsh
Judge Walsh no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Walsh decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Walsh treated statutory text and procedural posture as controlling when a party sought judicial intervention before an administrative process was complete.
“We may not and we will not assume that the consideration of the case by the field board of officers and by appellant’s commanding officer and the review by the Enlisted Performance Evaluation Board and by the Chief of Naval Personnel will be but a sham or a ‘rubber stamping’ process.”
He required a factual trial when contract language remained reasonably open to competing meanings rather than resolving the dispute on summary judgment.
“What the parties meant by the words is a controlling issue of fact in this case, to be determined in a trial at which the parties may offer evidence in aid of their respective interpretations of the language used.”
Procedural preferences
Walsh enforced exhaustion requirements where a party had an available administrative appeal and tried to collaterally attack the resulting classification instead.
“Having thus failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, it would seem to follow that appellant could not attack his I-A classification when prosecuted for failure to obey an order to report for induction made pursuant thereto.”
Cautions
He distinguished the validity of a contractual clause from the legality of coercive conduct used to enforce it.
“The proviso does not legalize strikes or other coercive action to enforce such clauses.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The several motions of the defendant, viz: to set aside and vacate the judgment and sentence, to discharge him from custody, and for a writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum, are denied.”
“Defendant is entitled to judgment dismissing plaintiff’s Complaint.”
“The evidence before the Court establishes that the defendants have engaged in acts and practices in violation of. Sections 5(b) and 17(a) (2) and (3) of the.Securities Act, 15 U.S.C. § 77e(b), § 77q(a) (2) and (3), and Section 15(c) (1) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78o(e) (1), and Rule 17 CFR 240.15cl-2, and entitles the Commission to a preliminary injunction.”
“The clerk will enter judgment forthwith in favor of plaintiff and against defendant in the sum of $1,000, together with plaintiff’s costs of suit; and judgment, further, that plaintiff take nothing by reason of Counts 5, 6, and 7 of its Complaint and that the same are dismissed.”
“Defendant’s commercial process as carried on in its Hayden smelter does not infringe any of the claims of Redmond Patent No. 2,895,821.”
“Plaintiff is entitled to a decree directing divestiture of Star and modification of the operating agreement.”
“For the reasons set out below, we find A.R.S. § 41-793, subsec. C unconstitutional.”
“We decline to issue the injunction requested by plaintiff, without prejudice to her right to renew the request if need be.”
“The judgment of the district court is affirmed”
“The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded to the district court with directions to enter judgment that appellee take nothing by the complaint, with costs to appellants.”
“The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the district court with directions to determine the question of the validity of the Parker patent, determine the question of infringement of Claims 3, 5, 7, and 17 of such patent, make findings of fact and conclusions of law as required by Rule 52(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C. and enter an appropriate judgment.”
“Reversed and remanded for trial.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
No electronic case-level dockets assigned to Walsh were located for this historical tenure, so no caseload mix or duration claim is made.
A historical record
Judge Walsh 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.