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 here.

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

About Judge Kravitch

Phyllis A. Kravitch was a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Appointed by President Jimmy Carter, Judge Kravitch was commissioned to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on March 23, 1979 and reassigned to this court on October 1, 1981. Judge Kravitch assumed senior status on December 31, 1996 and served until death on June 15, 2017.

How Judge Kravitch decides

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

What persuades

In Nachwalter v. Christie, she held that alleged oral agreements could not modify the written terms of the benefit plans at issue.

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

In United States v. Crape, she read the statute to permit revocation of an acquittee's conditional discharge only for failure to comply with the treatment regimen.

“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.”

In Esponda v. U.S. Attorney General, she invoked the principle that ambiguity in deportation law is construed in the noncitizen's favor when addressing the procedural omission at issue.

“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 National Union Fire Insurance Co. v. Travelers Insurance Co., she read Florida law to define the excess insurer's duties by its policy terms rather than an additional defense obligation.

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

Procedural preferences

In Hester v. International Union of Operating Engineers, she tied the limitations question to when Hester knew or should have known that the union grievance process had ended 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
09-11168 · 2010-04-06
Appeal (appellant) Denied

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

United States v. Nathaniel Hargrove
12-13231 · 2013-10-15
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“VACATED AND REMANDED.”

United States v. Larry Victor
12-12809 · 2013-06-27
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“AFFIRMED.”

Travaglio v. American Express Co.
11-15292 · 2013-08-19
Appeal (appellant) Moot / procedural

“Therefore, we vacate the dismissal of Travaglio’s complaint for failure to state a claim and remand this case with instructions that the district court dismiss for want of subject matter jurisdiction.”

Florida Med. Center of Clearwater, Inc. v. Sebelius
09-13922 · 2010-08-19
Appeal (appellant) Denied

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

United States v. Crape
09-12470 · 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
05-13875 · 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)
07-13915 · 2008-07-02
Appeal (appellant) Moot / procedural

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

Antonelli v. Warden, U.S.P. Atlanta
08-10608 · 2008-09-17
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“AFFIRMED.”

United States v. Cunningham
97-3419 · 1998-12-04
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“We AFFIRM Cunningham's conviction.”

National Union Fire Insurance Co. v. Travelers Insurance Co.
98-5552 · 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.
98-5729 · 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 here. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.