Pat Mehaffy
Judge Mehaffy no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Mehaffy decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
He required agency findings to rest on substantial evidence rather than suspicion about a party's motives.
“We hold that the Board’s findings are based on suspicion and speculation and that it has not met its burden of proof.”
He treated medical evidence supporting an agency's disability finding as conclusive on review.
“Since we find that there was substantial medical evidence to support the Secretary’s conclusion that claimant was not entitled to disability benefits, we have no alternative but to affirm the judgment of the district court.”
Procedural preferences
He protected access to judicial review where an administrative deadline was missed because the registrant lacked notice and promptly sought review once informed.
“We hold, therefore, that the government has failed to demonstrate any interests compelling enough to justify foreclosure of judicial review.”
He applied mootness when future injury depended on the remote sequence of another conviction and return to the same institution.
“There is no way that petitioner can be affected by any injunction that might issue except upon receiving another conviction and being returned to the same institution which is too unlikely an event to form a basis for this court to pass on the substantive issue”
Cautions
He used Rule 1's efficiency principle to prevent a litigant from reopening time-barred litigation with an unsupported affidavit.
“Fed.R.Civ.P. 1, 28 U.S.C.A., provides that rules “shall be construed to secure the just, speedy and inexpensive determination of every action.””
He required an actual or substantially possible conflict before treating joint representation as reversible error.
“absent evidence of an actual conflict of interests or evidence pointing to a substantial possibility of a conflict of interests between the co-defendants.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the reasons above stated, this appeal is dismissed as being moot. It is so ordered.”
“The judgment of the District Court denying the motion to vacate the sentence is affirmed.”
“The order granting Tri-State's motion for summary judgment is affirmed.”
“We affirm the judgment of the district court dismissing Tanner’s petition, without prejudice, for want of jurisdiction.”
“Finding no merit in appellant’s contentions, the judgment of the district court denying the motion is affirmed.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Not applicable to this circuit-court record.
A historical record
Judge Mehaffy 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.