Sherman Glenn Finesilver
Judge Finesilver no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Finesilver decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
He entered summary judgment when the evidentiary record left no genuine factual dispute and the governing forfeiture statute entitled the government to judgment.
“The Court thus finds that there are no genuine issues of material facts remaining and that the United States is entitled to judgment as a matter of law under Fed. R.Crv.P. 56.”
He recognized a third party's federal quiet-title route for litigating lien priority without deciding the underlying merits at the pleading stage.
“a private third-party lienor’s claim of priority over a federal tax lien on property within Colorado comes within the scope of a quiet title action under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2410(a)(1).”
He denied complete summary judgment when authority and responsibility within an investment relationship remained factually disputed.
“The question of authority in this matter remains a factual dispute and that summary judgment in favor of IAI is inappropriate.”
Procedural preferences
He resisted adding threshold requirements to public-enforcement statutes without clear support in the statutory text.
“Given the nature of the public interest involved and given the absence of clear statutory support for defendant’s position, this court is most reluctant to fashion a judicially created threshold barrier to suit such as the one suggested by defendant.”
He would not allow a party's choice of counsel to block otherwise proper fact discovery.
“A party may not *1474 frustrate discovery by its choice of counsel in a particular case.”
He treated federal transportation law as exclusively controlling claims for damage to interstate shipments.
“Federal law has superseded all state and common law claims in this area, and a carrier’s liability is governed exclusively by federal law.”
Cautions
He distinguished ordinary personnel error from a federal constitutional violation.
“The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is not a guarantee against incorrect or ill-advised personnel decisions.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Plaintiff is not entitled to bring a subrogation action against Defendant United States for PIP benefits it paid to its insured as a result of the bus accident.”
“The Court thus finds that there are no genuine issues of material facts remaining and that the United States is entitled to judgment as a matter of law under Fed. R.Crv.P. 56.”
“Claimant Frances May’s Motion For Summary Judgment, filed March 30,1994, is DENIED;”
“Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, filed March 26, 1993, is DENIED in PART and GRANTED in PART.”
“Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment, filed February 5, 1993, is GRANTED.”
“Defendant’s Second Motion to Stay Proceedings, for Protective Order, and to Quash Subpoenas, filed January 28, 1993, is DEEMED MOOT.”
“Plaintiffs Motion to Compel the Defendant to Respond to the Plaintiffs First Set of Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents, filed January 28, 1993, is DEEMED MOOT.”
“Defendant Earth Sciences, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment, to Dismiss With Prejudice, and to Enforce Settlement Agreement, filed November 12, 1992, is GRANTED.”
“Earth Sciences, Inc.’s Motion for Protective Order, filed November 12, 1992, is DEEMED MOOT.”
“Defendant United States’ motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is DENIED.”
“defendant’s motion for summary judgment is hereby GRANTED.”
“Accordingly, defendants’ motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment and for Rule 11 sanctions based on the filing of a spurious complaint are DENIED.”
“Defendants’ motions to dismiss or for summary judgment and to quash notice of depositions are DENIED.”
“ACCORDINGLY, defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.”
“Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.”
“IT IS ORDERED that defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED.”
“defendant’s motion to dismiss or for more definite statement be and hereby is DENIED.”
“Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is GRANTED.”
“Plaintiff’s Motion to file a Second Amended Complaint, which attacks the validity of Plaintiff’s dismissal as well as- of his suspension, and Plaintiff’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction, filed on February 4 and February 9, are moot as a result of this decision.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Finesilver's reported decisions include employment, tax, environmental, patent, insurance, forfeiture, federal-benefits, civil-rights, and commercial disputes. No retained electronic records are available to quantify his caseload.
A historical record
Judge Finesilver 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.