Robert Arthur Sprecher

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit circuit Retired 1982 · served 1971–1982 Appointed by Richard M. Nixon (Republican) 28 signed orders read

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

How Judge Sprecher decides

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

What persuades

Willing to recognize an implied federal remedy where policy supported it, holding that contribution is available among securities-fraud defendants.

“we conclude that contribution is available in a Rule 10b-5 situation although sought by separate suit”

Structured, element-by-element doctrinal analysis: he set out the required elements before applying a preclusion doctrine.

“Before res judicata can be applied to bar an action, several elements must be found: there must have been a previous, final judgment on the merits by a court of competent jurisdiction, involving the same causes of action between the same parties or their privies.”

Procedural preferences

Pragmatic about procedure over technicality: rather than dismiss and force relitigation, he used Rule 21 to add a necessary party even after judgment so complete relief could be granted.

“Under this rule, it has been held that a party can be added sua sponte by the court after judgment for remedial purposes.”

Deferential substantial-evidence review of agency fact-finding on a petition to enforce or review a Board order.

“Our review is limited to determining whether substantial evidence supports the findings of fact.”

Signed rulings

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

In the Matter of William Joseph Whistler Hardin, Bankrupt. James E. Shapiro, Trustee v. Union Bank and Savings Company
· 1972-04-06
Appeal (appellant (party challenging the judgment below)) Denied

“Since the bank cannot take advantage of the seller’s right of reclamation, we affirm the district court’s judgment without reaching the other issues raised.”

Louise Brown, Individually and on Behalf of All Other Persons Similarly Situated v. The Housing Authority of the City of Milwaukee
· 1972-12-08
Appeal (appellant (party challenging the judgment below)) Denied

“The decision of the district court is affirmed.”

Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation, an Agency of the United States v. Quinn Hogan
· 1973-03-29
Appeal (appellant (party challenging the judgment below)) Granted

“Reversed.”

United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local Union No. 520 et al., Defendants-Appellees
· 1973-04-18
Appeal (appellant (party challenging the judgment below)) Granted

“Judgment vacated and remanded for further proceedings.”

Darryl B. Deaktor v. L. D. Schreiber & Co., Al Phillips, Jr. v. The Chicago Mercantile Exchange
· 1973-06-29
Appeal (appellant (party challenging the judgment below)) Denied

“We see no further argument for staying the actions in the district court. The orders appealed from are therefore affirmed.”

United States v. Cahill Grain Company
· 1973-07-02
Appeal (appellant (party challenging the judgment below)) Denied

“The judgment of July 5, 1972, is affirmed.”

In the Matter of Joseph Wambach, Sr., Bankrupts, and Palatine National Bank, Intervening v. William L. Randall, Trustee in Bankruptcy
· 1973-08-06
Appeal (appellant (party challenging the judgment below)) Denied

“The judgment of May 5, 1972, is affirmed.”

Lydia L. Morales v. James A. Haines, Mayor of Harvey, Illinois
· 1973-10-11
Appeal (appellant (party challenging the judgment below)) Granted in part

“Affirmed in part; vacated and remanded in part.”

Oil, Chemical And Atomic Workers International Union v. American Maize Products Company
· 1974-01-28
Appeal (appellant (party challenging the judgment below)) Denied

“The judgment order granting the employer's motion for summary judgment is affirmed.”

In the Matter of James J. White, Debtor v. Board of Trade of the City of Chicago
· 1974-03-01
Appeal (appellant (party challenging the judgment below)) Denied

“The judgment order affirming the Referee’s turnover order and denying the Board’s petition for review is affirmed.”

In Re Albert Chernick, Bankrupt. Albert Chernick v. United States
· 1974-03-20
Appeal (appellant (party challenging the judgment below)) Denied

“The district court order is affirmed and the case is remanded to the referee for entry of an order that the debt of $25,747.12 is not dischargea-ble.”

The Clarion Corporation v. American Home Products Corporation and Lehman Brothers
· 1974-05-17
Appeal (appellant (party challenging the judgment below)) Denied

“The judgments in 73-1418 and 73-1419 are affirmed.”

A historical record

Judge Sprecher 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.