Loyal Edwin Knappen

How Judge Knappen rules, drawn from 25 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Judge Knappen 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 Sixth Circuit
Position
Circuit judge
Status
Deceased
Served
1910–1930
Appointed by
William Howard Taft (Republican)
Commissioned
January 31, 1910
Education
University of Michigan, B.A., 1873; Read law, 1875; University of Michigan, M.A., 1876
Signed orders read
25

About Judge Knappen

Loyal Edwin Knappen was a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Appointed by President William H. Taft, Judge Knappen received a commission on January 31, 1910. Judge Knappen previously served on the United States Circuit Courts for the Sixth Circuit, commissioned there on January 31, 1910. Judge Knappen assumed senior status on April 15, 1924 and served until death on May 14, 1930.

How Judge Knappen decides

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

What persuades

In Goldman v. Goldberger, he found that a party’s failure to state that the original agreement continued did not necessarily defeat the claim that it remained in force.

“a failure to so indicate is not necessarily fatal to, or even inconsistent with, his claim that the original agreement still continued.”

In Pace v. United States, he affirmed after finding that the defendant received a fair trial.

“The record impresses us that plaintiff in error has had a fair trial.”

Procedural preferences

In McIntyre, Knappen found no abuse of discretion in the denial of a new-trial motion based on newly discovered evidence.

“This discretion was not abused”

In Emery v. Central Trust, he dismissed an attempted appeal from a cross-bill ruling because it was not reviewable before final judgment.

“its dismissal was therefore not the subject of appeal, in advance of final decision in the original suits.”

Cautions

In Second National Bank of Cincinnati v. Pan-American Bridge Co., Knappen reversed and ordered a new trial because the jury instruction allowed a contractor to recover without an architect’s certificate if it was withheld “unreasonably and unfairly”; he held that the instruction needed to convey bad faith or a failure to exercise honest judgment.

“it should be made clear that they involve either bad faith or a refusal or failure to exercise honest judgment.”

In Avery-Loeb Electric v. Markel, he found the asserted work fell short of invention and directed judgment invalidating the patent claim.

“we think what Markel did fell short of invention.”

Signed rulings

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

Second Nat. Bank of Cincinnati v. Pan-American Bridge Co.
· 1910-12-06
Appeal (defendants plaintiffs in error) Granted

“Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered.”

Rode & Horn v. Phipps
· 1912-04-11
Appeal (bankruptcy claimants appellants) Granted in part

“As to these two excepted matters, the order of the District Court is reversed, and the cause remanded”

McIntyre v. Modern Woodmen of America
· 1912-11-07
Appeal (fraternal insurer defendant) Denied

“the judgment below is accordingly affirmed, with costs.”

Emery v. Central Trust & Safe Deposit Co.
· 1913-05-06
Appeal (cross-bill appellant) Moot / procedural

“The appeal is therefore dismissed.”

Goldman v. Goldberger
· 1913-11-04
Appeal (plaintiff in error) Granted

“The judgment of the District Court is reversed, with costs, and a new trial ordered.”

Schroth v. Monarch Fence Co.
· 1916-02-11
Appeal (bank appellant) Granted

“the order of the District Court should be reversed, with costs, and the cause remanded, with directions to dismiss the petition for'reclamation.”

Woo Vey v. United States
· 1917-06-30
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment of the District Court must be affirmed.”

Dickinson v. Scruggs
· 1917-06-30
Appeal (defendant plaintiff in error) Granted

“The judgment must be reversed, and the case remanded, with directions to award a new trial.”

Avery-Loeb Electric Co. v. Markel
· 1917-12-07
Appeal (accused infringer appellant) Granted

“The judgment of the District Court is reversed, and the record remanded to that court, with directions to enter decree finding claim 1 invalid.”

Hanson v. Royal Ins.
· 1919-12-03
Appeal (receiver appellant) Granted

“The order of the District Court is reversed, and the record remanded to that court, with directions to disallow the claims”

Brafford v. United States
· 1919-07-02
Appeal (criminal defendant plaintiff in error) Denied

“The judgment of the District Court should be affirmed.”

Grandi v. United States
· 1920-01-06
Appeal (criminal defendant plaintiff in error) Denied

“The judgment is affirmed.”

A historical record

Judge Knappen 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.