Albert Lee Stephens Sr.

How Judge Stephens rules, drawn from 25 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

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

Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Position
Circuit judge
Status
Deceased
Served
1937–1965
Appointed by
Franklin D. Roosevelt (Democratic)
Commissioned
June 18, 1937
Education
Read law (1899); University of Southern California Law School, LL.B. (1903)
Signed orders read
25

About Judge Stephens

Albert Lee Stephens, Sr. was a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Appointed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, Judge Stephens received a commission on June 18, 1937. Judge Stephens previously served on the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, commissioned there on August 24, 1935. Judge Stephens assumed senior status on January 25, 1961 and served until death on January 15, 1965.

How Judge Stephens decides

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

What persuades

Stephens deferred to trial-level factfinding when the record contained conflicting evidence and the findings were not clearly erroneous.

“we do not find the trial court’s findings of fact ‘clearly erroneous.’”

He applied the maintenance-and-cure obligation liberally to protect seamen and rejected restrictive distinctions that would undermine its remedial purpose.

“Typically, admiralty courts have given liberal interpretation to the obligation for the protection of seamen who are considered, in a sense, wards of the court.”

Procedural preferences

Stephens treated citizenship, not residence, as the jurisdictional fact required to plead diversity.

“Diversity of citizenship as a basis for the jurisdiction of a cause in the District Court of the United States is not dependent upon the residence of any of the parties, but upon their citizenship.”

He required a dismissal motion supported by outside affidavits to be treated as summary judgment, with the opposing party given a fair opportunity to respond.

“Fed.Rule Civ.P. 12(b) requires that the motion be treated as one for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56.”

Cautions

Stephens held that Fourth Amendment protection applies fully to a hotel room despite the temporary nature of the guest's stay.

“The right to privacy must be accorded with equal vigor both to transient hotel guests and to occupants of private, permanent dwellings.”

Signed rulings

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

Goldstein v. Polakof
· 1943-04-22
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“Affirmed.”

Farm Products Co. v. United States
· 1943-06-02
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“Judgment of the District Court vacated. Case remanded.”

Lount v. Mosher
· 1940-11-29
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“On the reasoning and authorities cited in the Collins case, supra, the judgment of the District Court dismissing appellant’s complaint in the instant case is affirmed.”

Jeffcott v. Donovan
· 1943-04-19
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“Reversed and remanded.”

United States v. Preston
· 1950-03-23
Appeal (appellant) Granted in part

“Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.”

Jubas v. Sampsell
· 1950-11-14
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“Affirmed,”

Gutierrez-Sosa v. Del Guercio
· 1957-06-21
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“Judgment affirmed.”

Stafford v. Russell
· 1955-03-30
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“Order affirmed.”

Higgins v. Binns
· 1953-06-29
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“Affirmed.”

Tam Dock Lung v. Dulles
· 1955-01-05
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“Affirmed.”

Lee v. Swope
· 1955-09-14
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment is affirmed.”

Daily v. United States
· 1961-07-08
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“Reversed and remanded.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Not applicable to this circuit-court record.

A historical record

Judge Stephens no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled here. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.