William W. Morrow

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit circuit Retired 1929 · served 1897–1929 Appointed by William McKinley (Republican) 25 signed orders read

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

How Judge Morrow decides

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

What persuades

Morrow treated a prior validity judgment plus clear infringement as ordinarily requiring temporary injunctive protection pending final hearing.

“the validity of the patent having been sustained by a prior adjudication in an action at law, and the infringement being clear, the court has no discretion to refuse a temporary injunction pending a final hearing upon the issues involved in the case.”

He treated an issued land patent as beyond executive cancellation, leaving fraud or error to judicial remedies.

“After a patent for public lands is once issued, ail control of the executive department: over the title ceases.”

Procedural preferences

Morrow declined to consider an objection that was not preserved in the record below.

“In the absence of a record presenting such an objection, it cannot be considered on appeal.”

He required the government to use the exclusive statutory tax-collection procedure before seeking equitable relief.

“The procedure provided by statute being exclusive, that procedure must be followed to enforce the payment of the tax.”

Cautions

Morrow deferred to trial-level factfinding based on conflicting testimony unless the decision clearly ran against the evidence.

“the decision of the District Judge, who had the opportunity of seeing the witnesses and judging their appearance, manner, and credibility, will not be reversed, unless it clearly appears that the decision is against the evidence.”

Signed rulings

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

Menasha Wooden Ware Co. v. Southern Oregon Co.
· 1917-07-16
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“the judgment is affirmed.”

Backus v. Yep Kim Yuen
· 1915-10-11
Appeal (appellant) Moot / procedural

“The appeal is accordingly dismissed.”

Rose v. United States
· 1917-02-13
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.”

McCurry v. United States
· 1922-02-13
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“We find no error in the proceedings of the District Court, and the judgment is therefore affirmed.”

Louie Share Gan v. White
· 1919-05-12
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The decision of the District Court is affirmed.”

Swanson v. Continental Casualty Co.
· 1926-04-19
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“It follows that the judgment must be affirmed; and it is so ordered.”

Grancourt v. United States
· 1919-05-12
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.”

Hovley v. United States
· 1922-01-16
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.”

Zahadeires v. United States
· 1924-05-26
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.”

Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. United States
· 1915-02-15
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“On the authority of that case, the judgment .of the court below is affirmed.”

Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. v. Chamberlain
· 1918-06-03
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment of the court below is therefore affirmed.”

United Verde Copper Co. v. Kuchan
· 1918-06-03
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment of the court below is affirmed.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Not applicable to this circuit-court record.

A historical record

Judge Morrow 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.