Smith Hickenlooper
Judge Hickenlooper no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Hickenlooper decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Leaves ordinary-care questions to the jury when the crossing evidence permits competing reasonable conclusions.
“it was clearly a question for the jury whether the conduct of plaintiff, a passenger, fell within such definition of due care.”
Places the burden on the party seeking equitable relief to prove the claim by a preponderance of the evidence.
“We find that the burden of proof was upon the complainant to establish his case by a preponderance of the evidence, and that he has failed to sustain this burden.”
Procedural preferences
Requires litigants to preserve appellate questions through the procedures governing the record on review.
“both litigants and counsel (most certainly counsel) are presumed to know the substantive law governing the prosecution of appeal and error proceedings and the preservation of questions for consideration of the appellate tribunal.”
Requires district courts to exercise jurisdiction over timely applications for extensions affecting appellate review.
“the District Judge should have exercised his jurisdiction in passing upon the application of appellant for an extension of time.”
Cautions
Rejects patent claims that merely apply an old combination to a convenient new use.
“the appellant’s concept was only one of an available and convenient use, possibly new, for an old combination.”
Requires deportation proceedings to provide a fair hearing based on lawful evidence within a reasonable time.
“give the alien the fair hearing on lawful evidence which is contemplated by the Immigration Act within a reasonable time”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the cause remanded for hearing.”
“The decision of the Board of Tax Appeals is affirmed.”
“that the decree of the District Court finding the claims of the patent to Miehelis, No. 1,428,701, valid and infringed, be reversed ; and that said decree of the District Court finding the claims in suit of the patent to Young, No. 1,058,285, valid and infringed, be affirmed.”
“However, the judgment finding such claims not infringed will likewise be reversed and the cause remanded to the District Court, with instructions to enter a decree finding claim 6 valid and infringed.”
“The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith.”
“Upon both grounds the decree of the District Court dismissing the bill of complaint is affirmed.”
A historical record
Judge Hickenlooper 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.