John Carbone Porfilio

How Judge Porfilio rules, drawn from 18 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

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

Court
U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
Position
district
Status
Elevated to a higher court
Served
1982–1985
Appointed by
Ronald Reagan (Republican)
Commissioned
1982-06-25
Education
University of Denver (B.A., 1956); University of Denver College of Law (LL.B., 1959)
Signed orders read
18

How Judge Porfilio decides

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

What persuades

At summary judgment, the court preserved a novel radiation-injury issue for a full factual record where expert testimony supported competing inferences.

“the fact that this argument raises an issue of first impression compels careful consideration of the issues against a full factual record.”

In an age-discrimination case, the court treated administrative exhaustion as satisfied where the charge gave functional notice rather than applying naming rules mechanically.

“technicalities are particularly inappropriate in a statutory scheme in which laymen, unassisted by trained lawyers, initiate the process.”

The court required antitrust plaintiffs to connect their alleged injury to competition, not merely to harm suffered by an individual competitor.

“The transmutation of state law torts into federal anti-trust violations would have to be based upon a finding that the injuries for which compensation is sought have an unreasonable effect on competition, as well as on a particular competitor.”

Procedural preferences

The court allowed discovery before deciding whether a securities claim could survive dismissal and summary judgment.

“motions to dismiss which are considered before the plaintiff has had a chance for discovery are subject to rigorous scrutiny.”

The court declined pendent jurisdiction where a comprehensive federal remedial statute supplied the governing relief.

“where plaintiffs seek relief under as comprehensive a statute as ERISA, I am satisfied that the federal statute sufficiently encompasses their complaint to offer full redress.”

Cautions

Under the bankruptcy standard then applied, the court treated intent as inferable when a chosen course of conduct made the harmful consequence nearly certain.

“where a particular consequence is so likely to flow from a course of conduct, one who embarks on that course will be treated as if he intended the result, even in the absence of evidence of specific intent to cause the injury.”

Signed rulings

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

Sant v. Stephens
· 1983-12-16
Motion for partial summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“ORDERED that defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment is denied.”

Motion for partial summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the quiet title issue is granted.”

Bush v. American Motors Sales Corp.
· 1984-01-09
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“ORDERED that defendants’ motion to dismiss the fifth claim for relief is granted.”

Salehi v. District Director, Immigration & Naturalization Service
· 1983-12-28
Motion to consolidate (petitioner) Granted

“ORDERED that the motion of plaintiff Hakimzadeh to consolidate action No. 83-JM-566 with the consolidated case of Saliehi, et al. v. District Director, et al., civil action Nos. 82-JM-1800 and 82-JM-1970, is granted.”

Habeas petition (petitioner) Moot / procedural

“FURTHER ORDERED that these consolidated cases are dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”

Ayala v. Joy Manufacturing Co.
· 1985-05-09
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“ORDERED the motion of the United States to dismiss plaintiffs’ second amended complaint is granted, and the claims against the United States are dismissed.”

Western Systems, Inc. v. Dynatech Corp.
· 1985-05-08
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“ORDERED that defendants’ motion for summary judgment, filed December 11, 1984, is granted on plaintiffs’ first through sixth claims for relief”

Terzak v. Usher
· 1983-09-30
Motion for preliminary and permanent injunction (plaintiff) Denied

“ORDERED plaintiff’s motion for preliminary and permanent injunction is denied, and her complaint is dismissed, the parties to bear their own costs.”

Atkinson v. City of Fort Collins
· 1984-04-20
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“ORDERED that the complaint is dismissed. Defendants are awarded costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1920 upon the filing of a bill of costs within 10 days from entry of this order.”

Pinsker v. Joint District No. 28J
· 1983-01-12
Motion for reconsideration (plaintiff) Denied

“His request for reconsideration is denied, and I shall stand upon my oral findings.”

Masri v. Wakefield
· 1983-07-28
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“ORDERED that the defendants’ motions to dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims under § 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 are granted;”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“the motions to dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims under § 14 are denied without prejudice;”

Motion for reconsideration (plaintiff) Moot / procedural

“the Motion for Reconsideration and the Motion to Strike are moot;”

Motions to strike (defendant) Moot / procedural
Miner v. International Typographical Union Negotiated Pension Plan
· 1985-01-31
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“Defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiffs' claims for punitive damages is denied;”

Motion for partial summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendants' motion for partial summary judgment is granted on Counts Ten through Fourteen, and these claims are dismissed.”

United States v. Trettenaro
· 1985-01-25

On the court’s own reconsideration of restitution orders in related theft cases, the court allocated restitution individually after considering proved loss, culpability, resources, and earlier payments.

Shorez v. City of Dacono
· 1983-11-09
Motion for partial summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“ORDERED that plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment is denied”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“FURTHER ORDERED that defendants’ motion for summary judgment is granted. In accordance with this order, plaintiffs’ first, second, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth claims are dismissed with prejudice.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

The reviewed decisions span civil rights, bankruptcy appeals, securities, antitrust, employment, products liability, immigration, public law, and environmental exposure. No electronic records were located to quantify the short district-court tenure.

A historical record

Judge Porfilio 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.