Alfred T. Goodwin

How Judge Goodwin rules, drawn from 32 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Judge Goodwin 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
1971–2022
Appointed by
Richard Nixon (Republican)
Commissioned
November 30, 1971
Education
University of Oregon (B.A., 1947); University of Oregon School of Law (J.D., 1951)
Signed orders read
32

About Judge Goodwin

Alfred Theodore Goodwin was a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Appointed by President Richard M. Nixon, Judge Goodwin received a commission on November 30, 1971. Judge Goodwin previously served on the United States District Court for the District of Oregon, commissioned there on December 11, 1969. Judge Goodwin assumed senior status on January 31, 1991 and served until death on December 27, 2022.

How Judge Goodwin decides

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

What persuades

A discrimination plaintiff opposing summary judgment must offer specific, significantly probative evidence that the employer's stated reason is pretextual; personal confidence in one's qualifications and a bare attack on witness credibility do not create a factual dispute.

“The plaintiff must also offer specific and significantly probative evidence that the employer's alleged purpose is a pretext for discrimination.”

California's common-law right of publicity protects against commercial appropriation of identity beyond literal use of a person's name or likeness. The method used matters only to whether the defendant actually evoked and appropriated that identity.

“The right of publicity does not require that appropriations of identity be accomplished through particular means to be actionable.”

Procedural preferences

Equitable surcharge for an inaccurate ERISA summary requires unjust enrichment or actual harm caused by the breach. Loss of the statutory right to an accurate summary, without reliance or a changed position, is not itself compensable harm.

“Appellants argue that the ‘harm’ of being deprived of their statutory right to an accurate SPD is a compensable harm, but we disagree.”

Cautions

Officers relying on a houseguest's consent must ask enough questions to support a reasonable belief that the guest shares use, access, or control over the specific private areas searched. Near-total ignorance does not establish apparent authority.

“The ‘police are not allowed to proceed on the theory that ignorance is bliss.’”

An agency decision must identify and substantively analyze the statutory ground on which it rests. Without that explanation, an appellate court cannot supply a different rationale or conduct meaningful review.

“we have no ability to conduct a meaningful review of its decision.”

Signed rulings

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

National Labor Relations Board v. Victor Ryckebosch, Inc.
· 1972-11-28
Petition for review (petitioner (National Labor Relations Board)) Denied

“Petition denied.”

Mary I. Boettger, Administratrix of the Estate of Clarence Stensrude, Jr., Deceased v. Dave Moore
· 1973-07-31
Appeal (appellant (Mary I. Boettger, administratrix/plaintiff)) Denied

“Affirmed.”

United States v. Angel Mora-Chavez
· 1974-04-26
Appeal (appellant (Angel Mora-Chavez, criminal defendant)) Denied

“Affirmed.”

Paradise Valley Investigation & Patrol Services, Inc. v. United States District Court, District of Arizona
· 1975-08-14
Petition for mandamus (Paradise Valley Investigation and Patrol Services, Inc.) Denied

“The writ is denied. ... We agree with the Fifth Circuit that a § 17 case is essentially a suit in equity and not an action at law within the meaning of the Seventh Amendment. ... The petition is dismissed.”

Swanson-Dean Corporation v. Seattle District Council of Carpenters
77-3891 / 77-3892 · 1981-05-26
Appeal (appellant (Swanson-Dean Corporation)) Denied

“Affirmed.”

John E. Demarinis v. Raymond J. Donovan, Secretary of Labor
· 1984-03-21
Petition for review (petitioner (John E. Demarinis)) Granted

“Judgment for Petitioner.”

Rosario Schuler v. Chronicle Broadcasting Company, Inc., dba KRON-TV
84-2740 · 1986-05-05
Appeal (appellant (Rosario Schuler, plaintiff-appellant)) Denied

“Affirmed.”

Guillermina S. Mossman, and Richard M. Rogers, Esq. v. Roadway Express, Inc.
· 1986-06-24
Appeal (appellant (Richard M. Rogers, Esq.)) Granted in part

“We affirm the imposition of sanctions but remand for the trial court to reconsider the amount awarded.”

Cranford Delano Newell v. Securities and Exchange Commission
· 1987-03-20
Petition for review (petitioner (Cranford Delano Newell)) Moot / procedural

“As a consequence, this petition was untimely filed and we lack subject matter jurisdiction over the action.”

Vanna White v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., a New York Corporation, and David Deutsch Associates, Inc., a New York Corporation
· 1992-08-19
Appeal (appellant (Vanna White)) Granted in part

“AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, and REMANDED.”

Akky v. BP America
· 1996-01-17
Appeal (appellant (plaintiff franchisees / Akky et al.)) Denied

“We affirm.”

Luis Alberto Montoya-Ulloa, Petitioner, v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Respondent
· 1996-03-26
Petition for review (petitioner (Luis Alberto Montoya-Ulloa)) Granted

“Therefore, we reverse the decision of the BIA and remand for further proceedings.”

A historical record

Judge Goodwin 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.