James Kenneth Logan

How Judge Logan rules, drawn from 26 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

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

Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Position
circuit
Status
Deceased
Served
1977–1998
Appointed by
Jimmy Carter (Democratic)
Commissioned
1977-12-16
Education
University of Kansas, A.B., 1952; Harvard Law School, LL.B., 1955
Signed orders read
26

How Judge Logan decides

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

What persuades

When a sentence below the statutory maximum was imposed, the court presumed that previously served time had already been credited unless the record showed otherwise.

“when a convicted defendant receives less than the maximum possible sentence, it is presumed that the trial court has credited defendant with time already served unless the record shows otherwise”

Limiting mandatory DNA collection to inmates convicted of sex offenses survived equal-protection review because it rationally advanced investigation of unsolved and future crimes.

“A rational relationship exists between the government’s decision to classify inmates as convicted sex offenders and the government’s stated objective to investigate and prosecute unsolved and future sex crimes.”

Procedural preferences

Reviews an ERISA plan administrator's benefits denial on a sliding scale, according its decision less deference where the administrator operates under a conflict of interest as both insurer and plan administrator.

“Because defendant does not adequately challenge the district court's finding that it operated under a conflict of interest in making its decision, the district court correctly accorded its decision less deference under this standard.”

A court considering dismissal of an indictment required the government to state its reasons so the exercise of discretion would remain reviewable.

“the district court correctly determined that it abused its discretion when it did not require that the government state reasons for its desire to dismiss the original indictment.”

A newly raised appellate issue was not considered when it depended partly on facts not presented to the factfinder.

“We decline to consider this newly raised issue.”

Cautions

A jury-instruction challenge was unavailing when counsel had not objected to the instructions when they were given.

“Defendant’s argument that the district court improperly instructed the jury is unmeritorious, particularly since its counsel did not object to the instructions at the time they were given.”

Signed rulings

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

Morris v. Harris
· 1981-10-28
Appeal (plaintiff-appellant) Denied

“AFFIRMED.”

Hamm v. Commissioner
· 1982-07-22
Appeal (petitioner-appellant) Denied

“AFFIRMED.”

Edwards v. Bray
· 1982-09-13
Appeal (petitioner-appellant) Denied

“AFFIRMED.”

Saupitty v. Yazoo Manufacturing Co.
· 1984-02-03
Appeal (defendant-appellant) Denied

“AFFIRMED.”

Jensen v. United States
· 1983-10-31
Appeal (plaintiff-appellant) Denied

“AFFIRMED.”

United States v. Derr
· 1984-01-23
Appeal (appellant-United-States) Denied

“Accordingly, the decision of the district court is AFFIRMED.”

New Mexico District Council of Carpenters v. Jordan & Nobles Construction Co.
· 1986-10-03
Appeal (defendant-appellant) Granted

“The district court's decision is REVERSED.”

United States v. Barrett
· 1988-01-27
Appeal (defendant-appellant) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM the ruling of the district court.”

Roberts v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.
· 1987-01-30
Appeal (defendant-appellant) Granted

“Accordingly, we VACATE the judgment entered below, and REMAND with directions that the trial court make further findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding the course of conduct between the parties, and then enter judgment in accordance with those findings and conclusions.”

Litvak Packing Co. v. United Food and Commercial Workers, Local Union No. 7
· 1989-09-21
Appeal (defendant-appellant) Denied

“Accordingly, the order of the district court enforcing the arbitration award is AFFIRMED.”

Bennion v. Utex Oil Co.
· 1990-06-08
Appeal (plaintiff-appellant) Denied

“AFFIRMED.”

John Deere Co. v. Gerlach (In re Gerlach)
· 1990-03-07
Appeal (appellant-creditor) Granted

“REVERSED and REMANDED for a determination of the amount of defendant's guaranty debt to John Deere that was obtained through defendant's fraud.”

A historical record

Judge Logan 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.