Joseph Winston Cox

Supreme Court of the District of Columbia (now U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia) district Deceased · served 1930–1939 Appointed by Herbert Hoover (Republican) 16 signed orders read

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

How Judge Cox decides

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

What persuades

He construed workers’ compensation claim requirements liberally where an informal filing clearly conveyed an intent to seek statutory benefits.

“Such statutes are to be interpreted with liberality, ‘to the end of securing the benefits which it was intended to accomplish’”

Evidence that prior references did not teach the claimed solution, together with practical and substantial advantages, supported patentability.

“The evidence is convincing that Smith taught something new and of practical and substantial advantage in the art.”

Cautions

He applied Congress’s privacy-protective rule against intercepted communications even where exclusion could allow some offenders to avoid conviction.

“Congress may have thought it less important that some offenders should go unwhipped of justice than that officers should resort to methods deemed inconsistent with ethical standards and destructive of personal liberty.”

He declined to impose liability for naturally forming ice while a severe winter storm was still in progress.

“the happening of the accident while the storm was in progress and at its height would seem to be a material factor distinguishing this case from those relied on by the plaintiff.”

Signed rulings

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

John P. Agnew & Co. v. Hoage
· 1937-01-12
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“The motion to dismiss the bill is granted, with leave to plaintiff to amend in ten days if so advised; otherwise decree to be settled on two days’ notice.”

United States v. Creech
· 1937-11-10
Demurrer (defendant) Denied

“The demurrer is overruled.”

Pessagno v. Euclid Inv. Co.
· 1939-01-16
Judgment notwithstanding verdict (defendant) Granted

“The verdict and judgment for plaintiff are set aside and judgment will be entered for the defendant as upon a verdict directed in its favor.”

United States v. Plisco
· 1938-02-11
Motion to quash (defendants) Granted

“The motions of the defendants .are granted.”

Motion to suppress (defendants) Granted
Metropolitan Casualty Insurance v. Hoage
· 1935-07-01
Application for injunction bond damages (defendant) Granted

“Accordingly, damages in the sum of $250 should be awarded and assessed in favor of the defendant against the plaintiff and its surety on the bond.”

Grondine v. Hoage
· 1934-03-23
Motions to dismiss (defendants) Denied

“The motions to dismiss the bill are accordingly denied.”

Fidelity Storage Co. v. Rubin
· 1933-07-01
Interpleader action (warehouse plaintiff) Granted in part

“The plaintiff and defendant Milton Rubin to pay the costs incurred by each respectively, and plaintiff to have lien for handling charges and also for storage charges except for the period of seven months above mentioned.”

Crowley v. Ickes
· 1935-07-01
Motion for rehearing (respondent) Granted

“The motion for a rehearing is accordingly granted.”

Petition for review (receiver petitioner) Denied

“And it is held, in conformity with the opinion of the Court of Appeals, that the original petition herein should be dismissed.”

National Pyrites & Copper Co. v. Wilbur
· 1933-05-23
Petition for review (petitioner) Granted in part

“To remove any misunderstanding it is held that the language just quoted from the memorandum opinion is to be extended to authorize consideration by the Secretary, not only of the amount paid on account of the purchase price, but also the entire contract for the purchase of the land, which provided for payments in interest bearing installments.”

Neissing v. Neissing
· 1933-07-01
Civil action (plaintiff) Denied

“The bill is accordingly dismissed. Settle decree on notice.”

Potomac Electric Power Co. ex rel. Doleman v. Levine
· 1934-01-27
Demurrer (plaintiff employer) Granted

“The plaintiff’s demurrer to the plea in abatement in this cause is accordingly sustained.”

National Savings & Trust Co. v. Rosasco
· 1933-07-01
Civil action (administrator claimant) Granted

“It is considered that the administrator is entitled to receive the note from the bank and to have a decree in his favor accordingly.”

A historical record

Judge Cox 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.