Phyllis Adele Kravitch

How Judge Kravitch rules, drawn from 30 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

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

Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Position
circuit
Status
Retired 2017
Served
1979–2017
Appointed by
Jimmy Carter (Democratic)
Commissioned
1979-03-23
Education
Armstrong Junior College (A.A., 1939); Goucher College (B.A., 1941); University of Pennsylvania Law School (LL.B., 1943)
Signed orders read
30

How Judge Kravitch decides

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

What persuades

She enforces the written terms of benefit plans and does not allow alleged oral assurances to alter those governing documents.

“the written terms of the plans cannot be modified by oral agreements.”

She begins with the statute's plain language and limits judicial authority to the condition Congress specified, even when a broader power might further the statute's general public-safety purpose.

“The plain and natural reading of this statute is that it empowers the court to revoke an acquittee’s conditional discharge only if he has failed to comply with his regimen of treatment.”

When immigration regulations create genuine ambiguity about the consequence of a procedural omission, she applies the principle that ambiguity in deportation law is resolved in the noncitizen's favor.

“The Supreme Court on several occasions has noted the longstanding principle that ambiguities in deportation laws should be construed in favor of the alien.”

In insurance disputes she derives an excess carrier's duties from the policy language and does not impose a separate defense obligation beyond the contract.

“We interpret Florida law to determine the duties of an excess insurer exclusively by the terms of the contract with its insured.”

Procedural preferences

For limitations questions arising from internal grievance proceedings, she looks to when the claimant knew or should have known that the union's process had reached its final action or broken down.

“when Hester knew or should have known of the Union’s ‘final action,’ i.e. the point where the grievance procedure was exhausted or otherwise broke down.”

Signed rulings

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

Randolph Starling v. Board of County Commissioners
602 F.3d 1257 · 2010-04-06
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The district court's order of summary judgment is therefore AFFIRMED.”

United States v. Nathaniel Hargrove
732 F.3d 1253 · 2013-10-15
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“VACATED AND REMANDED.”

United States v. Larry Victor
719 F.3d 1288 · 2013-06-27
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“AFFIRMED.”

Travaglio v. American Express Co.
735 F.3d 1266 · 2013-08-19
Appeal (appellant) Moot / procedural

“VACATED in part and REMANDED with instructions; AFFIRMED in part.”

Florida Med. Center of Clearwater, Inc. v. Sebelius
614 F.3d 1276 · 2010-08-19
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“Accordingly, we AFFIRM the district court's judgment upholding CMS's recoupment.”

United States v. Crape
603 F.3d 1237 · 2010-04-21
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“We therefore vacate the district court's order of revocation and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

Ilian Esponda v. U.S. Attorney General
453 F.3d 1319 · 2006-06-28
Petition for review (petitioner) Granted

“Accordingly, we GRANT the Espondas' petition for review and REMAND to the BIA for a determination of whether the grounds given on the Espondas' Notice of Appeal are adequate to apprise the BIA of the basis for their appeal.”

Barben v. Donovan (In re Donovan)
532 F.3d 1134 · 2008-07-02
Appeal (appellant) Moot / procedural

“Accordingly, we DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION.”

Antonelli v. Warden, U.S.P. Atlanta
542 F.3d 1348 · 2008-09-17
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“AFFIRMED.”

United States v. Cunningham
161 F.3d 1343 · 1998-12-04
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“We AFFIRM Cunningham's conviction.”

National Union Fire Insurance Co. v. Travelers Insurance Co.
214 F.3d 1269 · 2000-06-05
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“We REVERSE the district court's denial of National Union's motion for partial summary judgment and REMAND the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

Polo Ralph Lauren, L.P. v. Tropical Shipping & Construction Co.
215 F.3d 1217 · 2000-06-21
Appeal (appellant) Granted in part

“AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED and REMANDED in part.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Circuit judges do not carry a trial caseload; not enumerated.

A historical record

Judge Kravitch 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.