Thomas Ignatius Vanaskie
Judge Vanaskie no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Vanaskie decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Allows a consumer claim to proceed when a debt-collection letter plausibly threatens tax reporting that could not occur.
“remand for further proceedings”
Treats use of a defendant's post-Miranda silence as trial error requiring a new trial when the governing plain-error elements are satisfied.
“We agree.”
Procedural preferences
Applies the constitutional vagueness ruling to the immigration residual-clause provision and requires reconsideration of removal.
“vacate the order of removal”
Requires correction when an administrative law judge's reliance on invalid testing data permeates the benefits analysis.
“the ALJ’s reliance upon invalid data certainly provided grounds for a remand here.”
Cautions
Distinguishes strict-liability and negligence theories when applying the maritime bare-metal defense.
“strict liability claims”
Treats ordinary jail conditions as insufficient where the objective component of an Eighth Amendment claim cannot be met on undisputed facts.
“Because the objective prong of the Eighth Amendment inquiry cannot be satisfied on the undisputed facts presented here, there is no need to address the subjective prong.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“we will affirm the judgment of the District Court.”
“For the reasons discussed above, we deny the Petition for Review.”
“we will deny the petition for review and affirm the Department of Labor Benefits Review Board’s Decision and Order of July 25, 2014.”
“we will affirm the Judgment of the District Court.”
A historical record
Judge Vanaskie 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.