F. Owen Eagan

United States District Court for the District of Connecticut magistrate Retired 1996 · served 1975–1996 16 signed orders read

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

How Judge Eagan decides

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

What persuades

Eagan denied summary judgment where the statute-of-repose defense turned on a material factual dispute about the product's useful safe life.

“Since this is a material question of fact, summary judgment is inappropriate.”

He treated intertwined foreclosure and specific-performance issues as a reason to keep the claims together during the administrative stay.

“the relief sought by the defendants in the form of specific performance is intertwined with the foreclosure action”

Procedural preferences

Eagan favored a dispositive motion after discovery over testing legal arguments before the pleadings and factual record were developed.

“The defendant’s legal arguments are best presented by filing a dispositive motion after the parties are afforded adequate time for discovery.”

After dismissing the federal claims in a removed case, he returned the remaining state-law claims to state court.

“Having dismissed all claims presenting federal questions, The Court remands this matter to the state court”

Cautions

Eagan admonished counsel against generic removal papers that did not fit the case-specific record.

“avoid boilerplate language where, as in this case, such language is not appropriate”

He warned that affidavits not based on personal knowledge could mislead the court and lead to sanctions.

“the submission of baseless ‘affidavits’ constitutes bad faith and tends to mislead the court.”

Signed rulings

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

Lankton v. Bowen
· 1990-11-15
Motion for attorney fees (plaintiff) Denied

“For the aforementioned reasons, the court denies plaintiff’s motion for fees under the EAJA as this request is untimely.”

Connecticut Bank & Trust Co. v. CT Partners, Inc.
· 1991-05-09
Motions to remand (defendants) Denied

“the defendants’ motion to remand (docket no. 12) is DENIED”

Motions to stay (plaintiff) Granted

“the FDIC’s motion to stay (document no. 7) is GRANTED”

Motion to sever (plaintiff) Denied

“the FDIC’s motion to sever the counterclaims (docket no. 6) is DENIED.”

Darrah-Wantz v. Brown
· 1991-06-28
Application for prejudgment remedy (plaintiffs) Granted

“the plaintiffs’ applications for prejudgment remedy (document nos. 19 and 20) are GRANTED.”

Levine v. Federal Deposit Insurance
· 1991-05-28
Motions to dismiss (third-party defendant) Granted

“the defendant Messina’s motion to dismiss (docket no. 236) is GRANTED.”

Motion for partial relief from stay (counterclaim plaintiff) Granted

“The counterclaim plaintiff New CBT’s motion for partial relief from stay (docket no. 262) is GRANTED.”

Motion to sever (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff’s motion for severance (docket no. 260) is DENIED.”

Chapman v. Meachum
· 1992-04-08
Petition for writ of habeas corpus (petitioner) Denied

“the petitioner’s amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus (document no. 11) and motion for summary judgment (document no. 18) are DENIED.”

Summary judgment (petitioner) Denied
Habenicht v. Sturm, Ruger & Co., Inc.
· 1986-11-07
Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“Accordingly, defendant’s motion for summary judgment is DENIED.”

Federal Deposit Insurance v. Sextant Development Corp.
· 1992-05-06
Motion to strike jury demand (plaintiff) Granted

“the plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Jury Demand is hereby granted.”

United States v. Envirite Corp.
· 1991-11-07
Motion to reopen and set aside consent decree (defendant) Granted

“Envirite’s motion to reopen and set aside the consent decree (document no. 22) is GRANTED.”

Federal Deposit Insurance v. J.D.L. Associates
· 1994-10-18
Motion for permission to sue receiver (defendant) Denied

“this Court will not grant leave to sue.”

Federal Deposit Insurance v. Howard Shoreline Associates
· 1995-05-25
Motion to reopen strict foreclosure (plaintiff) Denied

“The Motion to Reopen and Set Aside Summary Judgment of Strict Foreclosure (# 135-1, 135-2) is DENIED.”

Meriden Trust & Safe Deposit Co. v. Federal Deposit Insurance
· 1994-06-30
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“The FDIC’s Motion for Summary Judgment (# 25) is GRANTED.”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Meriden Trust’s Motion for Summary Judgment (# 28) is DENIED.”

Westport Bank & Trust Co. v. Geraghty
· 1994-09-29
Summary judgment (federal receiver) Granted

“The FDIC’s Motions for Summary Judgment (#46, 51) are GRANTED.”

Summary judgment (federal receiver) Granted
Summary judgment (Norman M. Steere) Denied

“Defendant-Claimant Norman M. Steere’s Motion for Summary Judgment (# 60) is DENIED.”

Summary judgment (M. James Geraghty) Denied

“Defendant-Claimant M. James Geraghty’s Motion for Summary judgment (# 65) is DENIED.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

The reviewed decisions span banking, foreclosure, civil rights, products liability, habeas, environmental, and fee disputes but do not establish the distribution of Eagan's full caseload.

A historical record

Judge Eagan 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.