Shackelford Miller Jr.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit circuit Deceased · served 1945–1965 Appointed by Harry S. Truman (Democratic) 25 signed orders read

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

How Judge Miller decides

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

What persuades

Recognizes that a conspiracy may be proved through circumstantial evidence and reasonable inferences from conduct.

“But it is recognized that conspiracies are seldom capable of proof by direct testimony and it is settled that they may be inferred from the acts of the parties thereto.”

Distinguishes between a sole proximate cause and one of multiple proximate causes when framing jury questions.

“We believe that the words “the proximate cause” as used in the instructions were reasonably susceptible on the part of the jury of the meaning of the sole proximate cause, while the words “a proximate cause” would have negatived that meaning and recognized the legal principle that there may be more than one proximate cause and that liability may be imposed on more than one person”

Procedural preferences

Places conditional amendments to conform to proof within the trial judge's sound discretion.

“Rule 15(b), Rules of Civil Procedure, authorizes the District Judge to permit the filing of an amended pleading to conform to the proof, but the granting or refusing leave to so amend •under the particular circumstances rests in the sound discretion of the trial judge.”

Applies state-law property rights when determining what enters a bankruptcy estate.

“when the bankruptcy court takes over the bankrupt’s property, such property is taken subject to pre-existing rights established by the local state law.”

Cautions

Keeps the burden of proving a claimed tax deduction on the taxpayer even when proof is difficult.

“The fact that the circumstances may be such as to make it difficult or impossible, without fault on the part of the taxpayer, to prove a material fact necessary to establish a claimed deduction does not relieve the taxpayer of this burden.”

Requires the pleaded jurisdictional basis to cover the claims asserted.

“But the complaint bases jurisdiction upon Section 1343, Title 28, United States Code, which does not include such alleged torts.”

Signed rulings

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

Fielding v. United States
· 1947-12-12
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“it is accordingly ordered that the judgment of the District Court be, and is now, affirmed.”

Berryhill v. United States
· 1952-10-16
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.”

Brewing Corp. Of America v. Cleveland Trust Co.
· 1950-12-15
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“The judgment of the District Court is reversed, and the action is remanded for proceedings consistent with the views expressed herein.”

Manufacturers Acceptance Corp. v. United States
· 1951-12-31
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“The judgment of the District Court is reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings consistent with the views expressed herein.”

Moe Light, Inc. v. Wayne M. Foreman
· 1956-12-21
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment is affirmed.”

Watson v. Gallagher
· 1953-03-09
Motion to recall mandate (movant) Denied

“It Is Ordered that said motion be and is overruled.”

Francisco Ramirez-Rangel v. James W. Butterfield, District Director of Immigration and Naturalization, Detroit, Michigan
· 1956-07-05
Petition for review (petitioner) Denied

“The judgment is affirmed.”

Stemler v. Burke
· 1965-04-21
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“The judgments are reversed and the cases are remanded to the District Court for a new trial.”

Trotter v. Amalgamated Association Of Street Electric Railway And Motor Coach Employees Of America, Division 1303
· 1962-11-09
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment is affirmed.”

Ellsworth Strickler v. Pfister Associated Growers, Inc., a Corporation Whose Home Office is Aurora, Illinois, a Delaware Corporation
· 1963-07-17
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment is affirmed.”

Pennington v. United Mine Workers Of America
· 1963-12-18
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment in case No. 14810 is affirmed.”

United States v. Clifton Johnson
· 1964-06-12
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment is affirmed.”

A historical record

Judge Miller 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.