Frederick Pierce Lively

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit circuit Deceased · served 1972–2016 Appointed by Richard M. Nixon (Republican) 25 signed orders read

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

How Judge Lively decides

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

What persuades

Enforces administrative labor decisions when the board's findings are supported by substantial evidence.

“The Order of the Board is supported by substantial evidence and enforcement is hereby granted.”

Treats statutorily prescribed de novo review as a fresh examination of the full dispute rather than deferential review of the administrative record.

“This requires a reexamination of the entire matter rather than a mere determination of whether the administrative findings are supported by substantial evidence.”

Protects union members from discipline for meeting and discussing strike negotiations when federal labor law guarantees that activity.

“We hold that it was a violation of 29 U.S.C. §§ 411(a)(2) and (a)(5) for the Union to discipline Appellant for attending the meeting with other members of his union where progress in negotiation of a strike settlement were discussed.”

Procedural preferences

Requires a district judge presented with a substantial request to enjoin a state statute as unconstitutional to initiate the statutory three-judge-court process.

“We therefore conclude that this action must be remanded to the district court with directions that the chief judge of the circuit be notified of the application for injunction.”

Returns unresolved remedial questions within an arbitration award to the arbitrator rather than deciding them in the first instance.

“the case remanded with directions to submit it to the arbitrator for a determination of whether Olin is entitled to credit for the outside interim earnings of Hargis and a computation of any amount due.”

Cautions

Rejects reliance on the state-law two-issue rule in federal trials.

“This rule has no application to a trial in a federal court.”

Signed rulings

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

Redmon v. United States
· 1972-12-07
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.”

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 369 v. Olin Corp.
· 1972-12-18
Appeal (appellant) Granted in part

“The judgment of the District Court is vacated to the extent of the amount awarded the Appellee Hargis, and the case remanded with directions to submit it to the arbitrator for a determination of whether Olin is entitled to credit for the outside interim earnings of Hargis and a computation of any amount due. In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed.”

Wachtel v. West
· 1973-04-11
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment is affirmed.”

Blackmon v. United States
· 1973-03-12
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.”

International News Distributors, Inc. v. Shriver
· 1973-12-19
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“The judgment of the district court is vacated and the cause remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

Hamilton v. United States
· 1973-03-29
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.”

Southern Ohio Bank v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.
· 1973-06-07
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with the holdings herein.”

NLRB v. Wolverine World Wide, Inc.
· 1973-05-23
Petition for enforcement (petitioner) Granted

“The Order of the Board is supported by substantial evidence and enforcement is hereby granted.”

United States v. Becker
· 1973-10-05
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.”

Sims v. Sheet Metal Workers International Ass'n Local 65
· 1973-12-19
Appeal (appellant) Granted in part

“The cause is remanded for the further steps set forth in this opinion, and in all other respects the judgment of the district court is affirmed.”

Rivers v. Lucas
· 1973-04-24
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The order of the District Court is affirmed.”

Reeves v. Power Tools, Inc.
· 1973-02-22
Appeal (appellant) Granted in part

“The judgment is affirmed as to the appellee Omark Industries, Inc. and reversed as to the appellee Power Tools, Inc. A new trial is granted as to all issues between appellants and appel-lee Power Tools, Inc.”

A historical record

Judge Lively 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.