John A. Danaher

U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit circuit Retired 1990 · served 1954–1990 Appointed by Dwight D. Eisenhower (Republican) 43 signed orders read

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

How Judge Danaher decides

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

What persuades

He held that property passing to a bankruptcy trustee remains subject to the taxing authority's ordinary claims.

“We hold that the personal property in the hands of the Trustee on July 1, 1954, became, and is, subject to the District's personal property tax”

He sustained a jury verdict where the evidence amply supported it.

“The evidence amply sustains the verdict of the jury.”

Procedural preferences

Danaher required a party to exhaust the administrative remedies available to it before turning to the courts for relief.

“We conclude that appellant should have exhausted the administrative remedies open to it before seeking judicial intervention.”

He would not disturb a discretionary trial-court ruling absent a clear showing of abuse of discretion.

“Our review of the record does not disclose such abuse of discretion as to require reversal.”

Cautions

He set aside an agency order that had foreclosed a party from raising a statutory defense, remanding for the agency to consider it.

“To that end we set aside the Commission's order and remand this case”

He would not fault a trial judge's evidentiary discretion, including over grand-jury material, without a genuine showing of abuse.

“we find no basis for a conclusion that the trial judge abused his discretion”

Signed rulings

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

Green v. United States
· 1958-09-12
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“He ruled that the search and recovery of 229 capsules of heroin were lawfully incidental to a lawful arrest. We agree.”

McHale v. United States
· 1959-06-25
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“We have carefully considered the entire record in the light of appellant's claims. We find no error.”

Pine v. Chewning
· 1955-06-28
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“Granting appellant the most favorable inferences to which she may be entitled, we still find no error.”

Lord v. Lencshire House, Ltd.
· 1959-12-18
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“the trial judge correctly concluded that Mr. Lord had failed to establish an element essential to his recovery”

Shulman v. Mutual Benefit Health and Accident Association
· 1959-04-30
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“he could not show that loss of life resulted from the trauma "directly and independently of all other causes."”

Vito v. Vito
· 1959-11-25
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“Appellant's reliance upon the foregoing provision is misplaced.”

AEM, Inc. v. Ecke
· 1959-10-22
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“There is evidence to support the Board's findings as pertinently recited.”

Cadillac Publishing Co. v. Summerfield
· 1955-11-21
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“We conclude that appellant should have exhausted the administrative remedies open to it before seeking judicial intervention.”

Kennedy v. Reid
· 1957-10-08
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“Giving effect to Rule 2, we are satisfied that a just determination has been achieved, and we are bound to affirm the order.”

District of Columbia v. Young Men's Christian Association
· 1955-01-27
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“In the light of the Congressional purpose, we believe the District Court correctly interpreted the statute.”

Brown v. Collector of Taxes for the District of Columbia
· 1957-09-16
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“Reversed and remanded.”

Dayton Power and Light Co. v. Federal Power Commission
· 1958-01-10
Petition for review (petitioner) Granted

“The motions to dismiss Dayton's petition must be denied.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Not applicable to this circuit-court record.

A historical record

Judge Danaher 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.