José Alberto Cabranes
How Judge Cabranes rules, drawn from 23 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Cabranes left this court for the U.S. Supreme Court. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.
About Judge Cabranes
José Alberto Cabranes was a judge of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. Appointed by President Jimmy Carter, Judge Cabranes received a commission on December 10, 1979. Judge Cabranes left the court on August 12, 1994 on appointment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
How Judge Cabranes decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
He treated self-reported permit exceedances as sufficient to establish Clean Water Act liability on summary judgment.
“the court holds that there are no disputed issues of material fact with respect to the defendant’s liability under the Act for 164 violations of its NPDES permit.”
Cautions
He disqualified counsel when prior joint representation created a concrete risk that confidential information would reach former adversaries.
“The danger that information which Trinity intended to make known only to its fellow plaintiffs will now inadvertently be disclosed to the other defendants requires that Trinity’s motion to disqualify Professional’s counsel be granted.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Accordingly, the defendant’s motion to stay is denied.”
“Accordingly, the plaintiffs’ motion to strike the fourth special defense is granted without prejudice to the defendant’s amending its answer to allege knowing use of a defective product by one or both of the plaintiffs.”
“For the reasons stated above, the government’s motion to dismiss count one of the complaint is denied.”
“the plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment is granted with respect to any of the 37 reported permit violations that occurred within five years of the commencement of this action.”
“The defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment is granted with respect to any violations that occurred pri- or to April 23, 1979.”
“Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (filed Mar. 1, 1989) is GRANTED.”
“Plaintiffs’ ‘Motion for Determination of Choice of Law and Cross Motion for Summary Judgment on the First and Second Affirmative Defenses of Defendant Sturm, Ruger & Co., Inc.’ (filed May 19, 1989) is DENIED AS MOOT in light of the court’s ruling on the defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment.”
“Plaintiffs’ application for leave to amend the complaint is GRANTED, absent objection and pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 15.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the defendant’s motion to dismiss is denied and the plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment is granted.”
“For the reasons stated above, defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.”
“The judgment of the Bankruptcy Court is affirmed.”
“For the reasons stated above, defendant’s motion to dismiss Counts Four and Five of the complaint is granted.”
“For the reasons stated above, the order of the Bankruptcy Court is AFFIRMED, pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 8013.”
“defendant Allegheny Ludlum Corporation’s Motion for a Protective Order (filed July 30, 1990) is DENIED.”
“Plaintiff Allied-Signal, Inc.’s Renewal of its August 21, 1989 Motion to Compel and Motion to Compel Certain Deposition Testimony (filed July 30, 1990) is GRANTED with respect to Part A ## 1, 2, 3 and 4 (as modified in the oral hearing of August 17, 1990) and to the Part B deposi*139tions and DENIED with respect to Part A #5.”
“Accordingly, the plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment is hereby granted.”
A historical record
Judge Cabranes left this court for the U.S. Supreme Court. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled here. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.