Wendell Phillips Stafford

Supreme Court of the District of Columbia (now U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia) district Retired 1931 · served 1904–1931 Appointed by Theodore Roosevelt (Republican) 14 signed orders read

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

How Judge Stafford decides

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

What persuades

He treated deceptive accompanying claims as sufficient to defeat trademark priority even where the mark itself was not deceptive.

“the accompanying statements were, and their deceptive character is enough to disentitle the appellee to claim priority upon the ground of such use.”

He treated the District’s acceptance of a contractor’s bond after notice of the contractor’s position as powerful evidence that the renewed agreement retained its prior scope.

“the District accepted the Company’s bond covering the contract in its old terms.”

Cautions

He distinguished a request for affirmative equitable relief setting aside a completed sale from a defensive claim of hardship against specific performance.

“It is a case where equity is asked to give affirmative relief by setting aside a sale .and a deed under it.”

He required statutory authority or the obligee’s consent before a third party could sue on an official bond.

“Touching this bond there is no statutory provision that allows action thereon to be brought by a third party.”

He declined to treat a history of non-enforcement as a settled administrative construction without evidence that responsible officials had deliberately adopted that interpretation.

“wTe are only told that the authorities have omitted to enforce the act in such cases, not that there lias ever been a deliberate construction of the act by the proper administrative officers.”

Signed rulings

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

Coffin Redington Co. v. Turner
· 1917-05-26
Trademark appeal (trademark applicant) Granted

“The appellant’s registration should have been allowed to stand, and the appellee’s petition to be allowed registration on the ground of prior use should have been denied. Reversed.”

Mearns v. Harris
· 1917-01-02
Appeal (defendant-appellant) Denied

“Judgment affirmed with costs of this appeal.”

Armstrong v. Pennebaker
· 1912-05-30
Appeal (intervening petitioner) Denied

“the decree itself was correct, and is therefore affirmed, with costs. Affirmed.”

Fitzpatrick v. Capital Traction Co.
· 1917-01-10
Appeal (plaintiff-appellant) Denied

“The result is that the judgment should be affirmed with costs.”

Gray v. Ward
· 1916-12-04
Appeal (defendant-appellant) Granted

“Judgment reversed with costs and cause remanded with instructions to dismiss the same.”

Gaines v. Knecht
· 1906-05-09
Trademark appeal (trademark opponent) Denied

“The decision of the Commissioner is therefore affirmed”

Forrest v. Wardman
· 1913-06-02
Appeal (complainants-appellants) Granted

“The decree is reversed with costs and the cause remanded.”

Carr v. Washington & Old Dominion Railway
· 1916-03-06
Appeal (intervening defendants) Denied

“No error being found in the record, the decree is Affirmed.”

Reid v. Dodge
· 1916-03-07
Appeal (legatee-appellant) Granted

“The decree will be reversed and the cause remanded.”

District of Columbia v. Cranford Paving Co.
· 1921-03-07
Appeal (District of Columbia) Denied

“We think there was no error in the judgment, and it is therefore affirmed.”

Zinkhan v. District of Columbia ex rel. Langellotti
· 1921-03-07
Appeal (defendant-appellant) Granted

“The judgment must be reversed, with costs, and with directions to grant a new trial.”

Lawson v. Bailey
· 1921-03-07
Appeal (plaintiff-appellant) Denied

“The decree was right and is affirmed.”

A historical record

Judge Stafford 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.