Thomas Griffith Haight

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit circuit Deceased · served 1919–1920 Appointed by Woodrow Wilson 15 signed orders read

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

How Judge Haight decides

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

What persuades

Treats the validity of a foreign sovereign's territorial act as nonjusticiable in a U.S. court.

“in accordance with the rule that “the courts of one independent government will not sit in judgment on the validity of the acts of another done within its own territory,” it is not within the province of a court of this country to attempt to determine whether the requisition of the vessel was valid or invalid under the laws of Great Britain; it must be here accepted as legal, or, as it is sometimes expressed, such a question is not justiciable.”

Requires actual or constructive notice of a nonstructural store defect before imposing liability.

“before the defendant could be charged with a failure to perform its duty to Mrs. Cranston, it was necessary for the jury to find, feither that the defendant had actual knowledge of the worn-out or defective condition of the carpet a sufficient length of time before the accident happened to have enabled it to repair it, or to have warned Mrs. Cranston of its condition, or that its actual condition, at the time of the accident, had existed for such a length of time prior thereto that the defendant, in the exercise of reasonable care, should have discovered it before the accident and remedied it, or that its general condition before the accident was such that, in the exercise of reasonable care, the defendant must have anticipated that it would, in all probability, unless repaired or replaced, become dangerous to customers or persons lawfully passing over it.”

Procedural preferences

Reads the evidentiary record as a whole rather than isolating an unexplained portion.

“In this situation, it was not permissible to consider only a part of the evidence, separate from that which supplemented and explained it, or to accept the former and discard the latter. It was necessary that it be taken as a whole.”

Places the burden on the trustee to prove consent to summary bankruptcy jurisdiction.

“the burden was upon the former to demonstrate that the latter had consented to the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court.”

Cautions

Defers to a trial judge's credibility appraisal when the finding has ample evidence and is not inherently incredible.

“the finding of the learned trial judge that the method of dumping which was followed on this occasion was unusual and dangerous has ample evidence to support it, and that such evidence is not so opposed to the probabilities as to be considered incredible. In such a situation, as he saw and heard the witnesses and was thus in a position to properly appraise,their testimony, manifestly we would not be justified in holding that he erred in his finding.”

Signed rulings

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

Lederer v. Penn Mut. Life Ins.
· 1919-05-23
Appeal (tax-collector-appellant) Granted

“it follows that the judgment must be reversed, and a new trial granted.”

The Adriatic
· 1919-06-07
Appeal (charterer-libellants-appellants) Denied

“The decree will accordingly be affirmed, with costs.”

Kaufman Department Stores, Inc. v. Cranston
· 1919-06-14
Appeal (store-defendant-appellant) Granted

“It follows that the judgment must be reversed, and a new trial granted.”

Philadelphia & R. v. McKibbin
· 1919-06-24
Appeal (railroad-defendant-appellant) Denied

“Finding no error in the record, the judgment below is affirmed, with costs.”

Chass v. United States
· 1919-06-26
Appeal (criminal-defendant-appellant) Denied

“The judgment below is accordingly affirmed.”

Paramount Hosiery Form Drying Co. v. Moorhead Knitting Co.
· 1919-10-13
Appeal (patent-plaintiff-appellant) Denied

“The decree appealed from is therefore affirmed, with costs.”

Trader v. United States
· 1919-10-28
Appeal (criminal-defendant-appellant) Denied

“The judgment below is accordingly affirmed.”

Alpha Portland Cement Co. v. United States
· 1919-11-26
Appeal (taxpayer-plaintiff-appellant) Granted

“The judgment is reversed, and a new trial granted.”

Central R. Co. of New Jersey v. De Busley
· 1919-12-02
Appeal (railroad-defendant-appellant) Denied

“Finding no error in the record, the judgment is affirmed.”

United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Robert Grace Contracting Co.
· 1920-01-16
Appeal (surety-defendant-appellant) Granted

“The judgment is reversed, and a new trial granted.”

Olivier v. Mt. Union Tanning & Extract Co.
· 1920-02-12
Appeal (plaintiffs-appellants) Granted

“We will accordingly direct that the judgment be reversed and a new trial granted”

Bergdoll v. Harrigan
· 1920-02-26
Appeal (shareholder-appellant) Granted in part

“the order appealed from, in so far as it fixes the personal liability of the appellant and the amount thereof, will be reversed; but in so far as it adjudicates the necessity for an assessment on the stock of the bankrupt and the rate thereof, and as to those who appear prima facie subject to the assessment, it will be affirmed.”

A historical record

Judge Haight 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.