John Clifford Wallace
Judge Wallace no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Wallace decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Cautions
Review of military conscientious-objector decisions was narrow; the court looked for record support rather than deciding the application anew.
“It is clear that this Court is not to try the case de novo, nor to give an opinion that this Court might render if it were called upon to determine whether or not the petitioner should be accorded a C.O. status.”
Even after finding a discriminatory policy unlawful, Wallace limited relief prospectively where the employer had followed an explicit state rule amid changing federal guidance.
“Therefore, this decision is to have prospective application only. Rohr will be given a reasonable time, not to exceed sixty days from the date of this opinion, to remedy its discriminatory rest-break policy.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Since the petitioner has failed to exhaust all of his military remedies and, therefore, has failed to establish the jurisdiction of this Court to hear the petition, it will not be necessary to decide the merits of the Constitutional claims. His petition, accordingly, is dismissed and the temporary restraining order is dissolved.”
“The petition for a writ of habeas corpus is denied and the temporary restraining order is dissolved.”
“The motion to strike is, therefore, granted.”
“It follows implicitly from the foregoing that Rohr’s rest-break policy was and is in violation of Title VII.”
“The Court, therefore, holds that the state regulation requiring rest breaks for women is contrary to the objectives of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and it is, therefore, preempted by Title VII by virtue of the Supremacy Clause.”
“However, under the present facts, this Court cannot say that the Food and Drug Administration is acting arbitrarily or capriciously in preventing the clams of the plaintiff from being imported from the particular growing beds involved and with the added facts elicited at trial, a permanent injunction would not be appropriate.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
No matching historical assigned-case cohort was located, so this record makes no claim about Wallace's district-era caseload mix.
A historical record
Judge Wallace 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.